The universal basic income or income: operating debate

philosophical debates and companies.
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by sen-no-sen » 09/03/17, 23:16

Ahmed wrote:Pétrus rightly emphasizes the balance of power unfavorable to employees, which does not bode well for a possible distribution or organization of work. The way out cannot be the claim of a "right" to work which only refers to the determinisms which are the causes of this inexorable destruction, but only by positioning outside the categories specific to these determinisms.


It is very clear that our society, even our civilization tends to collapse.
To avoid this it would have been necessary to implement a certain number of measures (hence my wishes located above) to generate a bifurcation a little more favorable to our fate ...
But let's not dream, only serious events will bring the global brain out of torpor.
I think, like B. Meheust ou F.Roddier that it is in fact too late and that we are going to have to "live with" the world we have created.
However, there are initiatives which, sown today, may bear fruit when the time comes.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by Ahmed » 10/03/17, 17:37

I am one of those who doubt that the reality of the collapse would provoke salutary reactions *; on the contrary, like a room crowded with people invaded by smoke sees the crowd rushing towards the exits and the panic killing those whom the fire would easily spare. In other words, I do not believe in the pedagogy of disaster ...
There remain these initiatives of which you speak: they exist everywhere, but in our countries, although numerous, I doubt that they have reached a sufficiently critical dimension to weigh in due time. This is certainly not the case in the Latin American countries, I concede to you, both for this question of dimension and also because the pressure of comfort and the subjective conditioning which goes with it is much less than in our old country.

* We are currently able to stubbornly deny the precursor phenomena and there is nothing to confirm that a more blatant reality would not be the subject of the same denial. Admitting that I am wrong, what is possible, why a better path would suddenly be chosen (which supposes a serene analysis which is not done today, although we have the necessary time and resources) while finding a scapegoat is much easier ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by sen-no-sen » 10/03/17, 23:12

Ahmed wrote:I am one of those who doubt that the reality of the collapse would provoke salutary reactions *; on the contrary, like a room crowded with people invaded by smoke sees the crowd rushing towards the exits and the panic killing those whom the fire would easily spare. In other words, I do not believe in the pedagogy of disaster ...


However, it was following disasters that the various regulations appeared.
To take your example of a crowded room invaded by smoke, it was following the fire at "5" "7" in Saint Laurent du Pont in Isère (1970) and its 55 victims that the first were set up. regulations on the use of materials in public buildings.
It is very clear that the period of collapse will in no way favor good measures, chaos will only generate violence and madness.
However, the post-collapse period should logically lead us to the "right solutions" * .. if humanity survives! :frown:
Like what I am optimistic! :P

Admitting that I am wrong, what is possible, why a better path would suddenly be chosen


It will not be chosen in any way, it will present itself as the only possible outcome, which is different.
Humans do not choose much in their lives, moreover we do not really think, we reflect the illusion of everyday life.
When the western decor of economism will have fallen, we will be better able to see the real, however this reality which we will have to face will probably be nightmarish ...


* A good solution does not mean respect for human rights, but rather a return to the natural order of things.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by Ahmed » 11/03/17, 12:57

I agree when it comes to limited disasters, but making a correction to a specific problem is very different from the possibility of making a radical change in the global model ...
Of course, "humans do not choose much in their life" *, but a greater participation would nevertheless be eminently desirable ... Moreover, the truth is not in reality, it is necessarily a construction of thought.

* Karl Marx: "It is men who make history, but they do not know the history they are making"
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by sen-no-sen » 11/03/17, 20:54

Ahmed wrote:I agree when it comes to limited disasters, but making a correction to a specific problem is very different from the possibility of making a radical change in the global model ...


Depending on the form of collapse * encountered, societies will have to adapt or disappear. To the extent that resilience is required, the mistakes of the past should at least slow down the trend towards the right path, if events allow. .. (not won).
Overall, the hundreds of phases of extinction from the animal world tell us that each crash phase is followed by a creative boom.
Obviously we can imagine a post-collapse scenario giving pride of place to totalitarianism and barbarism, but let's say that this should not last forever and favor the emergence of "something else".


* There are different possible forms of collapse: a total collapse such as a global disaster, or, more pernicious, an ontological collapse linked to the convergence of NBICs.
In the current framework we are moving towards this latter type of scenario, and that is why the UK is thought of: allowing the transition to a new world without the masses of the people really realizing it.
According to specialists in the field, the convergence of NBICs should emerge in the period 2030/2050, the UK meanwhile should be implemented in the next 10/15 years in all likelihood.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by Ahmed » 11/03/17, 21:41

Overall, the hundreds of extinction phases in the animal world tell us that each crash phase is followed by a creative boom.

Of course, a total disappearance of man would cause a considerable expansion of other species (current or new species, adapted to the conditions that we would have left behind us ..). In a more favorable scenario for us, there would certainly be a new beginning, but after a rather long phase of stagnation, the time to reset the psyche, "reset" prior to the development of a project. We therefore agree on this point.

In the current framework, we are moving towards this latter type of scenario and that is why the UK is thought of: allowing the transition to a new world without the masses of the people really realizing it.

Yes, this supposes a progressive renouncement of economism in favor of hypertechnicism, but the proponents of this ideology are likely to be taken of course by the collapse of the first before being able to establish the second ... unless the two events are finely piloted to coincide, which does not seem very likely in view of the statements of the official prophets ... but is this perhaps also part of the scenario?

If we accept this hypothesis (whether voluntary or determined), the UK would facilitate the pursuit of the concentration of powers in a small core of people who would manage to free themselves completely from the rest of humanity and thus deploy a artificial universe by a contraction of technical means (a kind of technico-scientific "big crunch"), which would no longer be oriented towards mass production, but towards transhumanist-type objectives.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by sen-no-sen » 11/03/17, 22:04

Ahmed wrote:Yes, this supposes a progressive renouncement of economism in favor of hypertechnicism, but the supporters of this ideology are likely to be taken by surprise by the collapse of the first before being able to establish the second ...


What is the economy in the deepest sense, if it is only an exchange of energy / information?
Even in a world driven by algorithms and by non-biological living entities the notion of economy will always be present.
From a historical point of view, the economy, whatever its forms consist in exchanging raw materials, services etc ... in order to guarantee the maintenance in operation of a structure.
However, this notion will always apply, and more than twice that in a hyper-technological world hungry for energy.
It is therefore important to observe the evolution of the economy towards its new forms, the UK - among others - could endorse such a transformation.
I often insist that capitalism, socialism, communism, and other liberalism do not exist objectively, and are in reality only the forms that economism * takes over time.

the UK would facilitate the pursuit of the concentration of powers in a small nucleus of people who would manage to free themselves completely from the rest of humanity and thus deploy an artificial universe by a contraction of technical means (a sort of "big crunch" technico -scientific), which would no longer be oriented towards mass production, but towards transhumanist-type objectives.


In fact, the automation of the means of production should allow the emergence of a globalized hyper-class (to use the term J. Attali) which could reach a level of development never seen before.
And indeed, if we look at history it appears that the increase in the dissipation of energy from societies has always allowed an explosion of means, all the more so among the ruling classes. So there is no reason why it should not stop.
The only thing equal in the world being death, one can logically imagine that research (on the way to succeed) on the decline of death beyond the biological possibility of our species constitutes a new selective advantage for the powerful.



* Economism (and are technologically inclined material) seems to me the term, failing to find better, the most adequate.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by Ahmed » 12/03/17, 19:57

I gladly grant you the universality of exchanges (which do not concern only the human species) but using the term economy for all cases remains problematic. For my part, I situate myself at the antipodes of this generalization (this is obviously only a lexical question and not a substantive one), since I make myself guilty of the opposite excess by restricting this term to the specific form that have took exchanges in capitalism, since I see the latter not as an intensification of previous exchanges, but as being of a completely specific nature.
The end of capitalism only means that of this particular form of exchange and not the end of exchanges, of course. What interests me, however, is how the end of a system happens under the weight of the accumulation of its contradictions and the possible emergence of a new paradigm: the transitional phase is absolutely new.

You write:
I often insist that capitalism, socialism, communism and other liberalism do not exist objectively and are in reality only the forms that economism * takes over time.

All these "isms" are only variants of capitalism ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by sen-no-sen » 12/03/17, 20:53

Ahmed wrote:I gladly grant you the universality of exchanges, (which do not concern only the human species) but using the term economy for all cases remains problematic.


It is indeed a matter of semantics, was the archeopteryx a bird? Hard to say ... The same goes for the economy, where does it really start and where does it end?
It is all the difficulty of defining reality through the impermanence of the world.

All these "isms" are only variants of capitalism ...


Only if we stick to a classic approach.
Will we talk about capital in a world populated by cyborgs? I highly doubt it, however the notion of economy will still be valid.
More generally, we can speak of cybernetics, a term which seems to me to fit well with the notion of economy and technology.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Basic income or universal income: functioning, debate




by Ahmed » 12/03/17, 22:30

It's not that difficult: you just have to agree on the content of the terms used! I would like the "natural" economy to be distinguished from the capitalist economy. Unfortunately, there is no separate phrase, but this does not pose so much of a problem, since it is a question of specifying each time the semantic scope concerned. The impermanence of the world leads us to use the same terms to designate phenomena which are formally similar, but nevertheless substantially different.

In a world of cyborgs, the notion of capitalism would indeed be obsolete, but I was only referring to real socialism, which was only a state variant of capitalism.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Google [Bot] and 231 guests