Technologically enhanced basic income as a solution to technological unemployment

Current economic theory simply does not consider the possibility that robot labor might replace human labor as the primary source of economic growth. Only the science fiction community has taken this idea seriously. (Albus, Path to a better world: A plan for prosperity, opportunity, and economic justice, 2011).

The youth unemployment rate in European countries has been estimated to be as high as 62% (Thompson, 2013) and if the current trend continues the birthrate will always out pace the job creation rate it can be expected that youth unemployment will continue to rise to higher levels. The generation of youth today face an opportunity crisis caused in part by the high cost of education, the debt load, and technological unemployment.

The problem we wish to solve is technologically enhanced unemployment which works around the current paradigm of convincing human beings to attempt to compete with robots, machines, and intelligent machines in the workplace for employment. The new paradigm as part of the solution we are presenting is a world where the incorruptible intelligent machines take care of the human being rather than compete against.

The solution categories are political and technological

There are generally two categories from which solutions to high unemployment are formed and chosen. The political category and the technological category. Each category of solution has it’s pros and cons and we do not wish to diminish any alternative solution which has a measurably positive impact on solving the problem. What we are promoting is a technological safety-net to supplement or in other words provide axillary power to the traditional political safety-net. If the one fails then there is technologically based resiliency and redundancy.

Read more –

#BasicIncome #cryptocurrency #technology #decentralization

Technologically enhanced basic income as a solution to technological unemployment | DarkAI Blog

This proposal is presented for peer review purposes. Please shoot it down if you think it sucks, improve on it if you can, and I'll credit you as a
Chris McAllister 6 years ago from Diaspora