Unironically what era do you want to go back to?

You're thinking of current safety nets. Current safety nets create a situation where the poor/ill are forced to not work. Any work they do = cancellation of safety net. UBI = universal, no questions. Thus if a poor person who gets help in paying bill wants to try working temporary jobs, they can earn even more money.

By being intelligent.

2004

because you're useless to them, you've been replaced by machines. you're probably a risk too.
maybe they'll keep roasties to satisfy their sexual desires.

This photo literally hurts. Couple more years and boomers will have Hiro add it to a ban list.
Holy fucking shit. Imagine going back to the industry in 1998 and riding that wave. Game industry, software industry, tech industry. The innovation, the opportunity, the possibilities. Guys who came out of the 90-2000 software era are on-fire to this day.
Jaw dropping how wrong everything went after about ~2007. Games, internet, software all went to shit. People just went crazy about MS Word coming out on phones. Word. That's how shitty modern software is.

You can never go back.

Attached: madmen.jpg (480x360, 6K)

no ubi is the same shit. what it does to prices creates the exact same hole. high taxes and universal income is the start of neo-feudalism and will only make wealth disparity even more extreme.

Attached: 1563154267971.png (352x264, 67K)

It astounds me that zoomers feel this way about soulless Wintel shit.

Hunter-gatherer society

I want to be born in 1980
Get to experiences the 90s as a teenager
Go to college and have a career in the 2000s
Then off myself at 30 after losing my job in the 2008 recession
Perfect life.

Wrong. Giving everyone $1000 /m for example doesn't create any additional wealth disparity, it instead reduces it. $1000 to a billionaire is nothing but ass wipe change. $1000 to poor shitter is more than enough to live off comfortably. For the middle class, it would be decent bump in income.

The whole "high tax" is bs. There's currently 12-15% of the US under poverty. US spends ~$9K per year for people in poverty already. This would mean they're constantly on welfare support and cannot get out. This is the current extremes in the US. They cannot get out because the moment they step outside the safety net, they're cut off from the system completely.

Imagine 40 million additional people producing work for a country. If they all were told that if they start working, they can double their income and not lose any of the benefit. Now instead of a wealth drain, they're a wealth creator.

Based and yangpilled

>Unironically what era do you want to go back to?

Attached: flying_pyramids_1200.jpg (1200x750, 186K)

nothing wrong leeching off robot's hard work

late 80s to mid 90s was the perfect era

1 question famski
ubi has the same issue with raising minimum wage (if not worse)
wont products just go up in price if everyone suddenly has an extra grand a month?

I want to leap forwards, too. Maybe a 1,000+ years to get a clean slate. I do not really care for the present.

Products will go price if the tax is heavy. But it won't be heavy of a tax. If for example everyone get $1000/m. And the tax is heavily increased by 20%, then lets say goods/services is increased by 30% to "offset" the heavy tax. The poor will still come out on top by a lot. The medium income will come up slightly. The higher ends may have to shoulder additional burden which they won't feel because it won't affect their lifestyle, just the additional savings.

Realistically, a small 5-10% tax increase will probably be enough to give everyone $1000/m. On top of that, we can cut down on some redundant systems like social security and overall, economy will stay roughly similar rate. There might be slight inflation, but market forces will keep the prices down.

Ofcourse this is without taking robots/ais into account and just having a normal economy. With robots/ais/etc, small taxation on them might bring forth more returns but we don't want that yet. We need more robots in the industry where it will thrive even when they are taxed.

For people who already hace a decent QoL, the change might not matter much. For the impoverished, the marginal benefit of UBI will probably outweigh any theoretical increase in inflation. We can divert funding from existing welfare programs into UBI to avoid circulating more money.

early to mid 80s was peak but mid 90s was pretty comfy

this will only work if birthright citizenship is elimimated, otherwise the system will completely collapse under the weight of immigration.

I think to have been doing CS graduate research at uc berkeley in the late 80s would have been peak comfy

Attached: 1542334607102.gif (320x240, 2.42M)

No, birthright citizenship isn't an issue. More citizens means more workforce. UBI isn't a limiting factor but a more robust/less bureaucratic permanent safety net.

The problem is open borders, borders need to be secured properly to take in highly skilled individuals and a smaller portion of refugees. The 40 million mexican crossing the border is a huge issue that surpasses any other immigrants by factor of 10.

Why is that man playing video games and wasting his life with childish things?

Attached: Nintendo Labo for Adults Like Me.jpg (936x1306, 337K)

I want to go forward to the WW3.

>universal basic income

ah yes, government funded NEETs

People like you are no different than the outspoken gay haters. At the end of the day, sucking dick and playing games more than most.

Hey, it isn't just "childish things"
That's a Playstation. This dude is living it up

To the fifth grade and kick a guys ass just because we we're talking to one another while taking a piss and we both looked at each other and took the opportunity to spread a rumor that I was gay.

Government already funds needs via social security/safety nets. But not only does it fund it, it incentivizes it today.

UBI is ironically a way to fix this by allowing people on safety nets to work without fear of their safety net being cut off. Even disabled individuals can work at something if they are told their disability won't be cut off if they tried.

The current system punishes re-integration by cutting off any support they have.

90s and early 2000s
world ended for me in 2011

Attached: dakannchuj.jpg (1920x1080, 302K)

>no different than the outspoken gay haters
Where do I sign up? They sound pretty based and redpilled. Are you winning, son?

UBI will make it bigger and without limits. But I guess you don't care about global economic collapse, commie.

gb2 your containment board

Attached: 1499709762216.jpg (838x434, 136K)

Communism is class warfare, lack of private ownership, etc. UBI is universal and no class warfare is involved. It encourages capitalism from there on by allowing people more opportunities for success in private enterprises. Its a step up from the "communism" that is the current safety net.

>It encourages capitalism from there on by allowing people more opportunities for success in private enterprises.

At the expense of the taxpayer’s dollar. You’re still redistributing wealth.

ok, I will take the bait. How will UBI maintain the economy of a country and promote progress? You could say "it will allow people with talent to be able to focus in improving without the worries of minimal survival". It can be true but what are you going to do with the people that will leech out of the system like you said it is already happening with social security?

Also, it will mean higher taxes unless you make corporations to pay more taxes but also the wages will get lowered because business won't have to pay a minimal because the government is already in charge of it.

In a utopia where people are sincere, it could work. But it won't work right now.

thanks for the replies anons, wasnt sure how much something like ubi would impact pricing
i think regardless of where the money were to come from, there would be some kind of price increase, cus there is anyway regardless, just the difference is something i wasnt sure of
i cant imagine it actually being super useful for the dumbest people, since they'll blow the money anyway
but i'd like to think that it might help some people, who'd be less likely to spend it all on nights out and stuff like that (who knows, maybe even save some)
still not 100% sold on the idea, but its one of the better ideas from what i can gather
tho i am the big stoopid

Wrong. Taxpayer's dollars are already spent on social safety nets like social security/medicare/medicaid/food stamp/etc. UBI is there to cut off the bureaucratic process and simplify the process.

>redistributing wealth
What do you think taxes are? The schools that you went to? The roads that you drive on? The hospitals that you goto? The insurance that you pay for is for? These are all wealth redistribution.

If your argument is, it will make rich people poor and poor people rich, that's not happening. Rich will get richer, poor will just be less poor. But they won't be punished for trying to break out of poverty. This creates an incentives for the poor people to succeed even more, thus making more people richer in the process and driving capitalism forward.

Early/mid 00s was my nostalgic peak so I'd have to go with that. That was the time when lower middle class families started getting computers, it was pretty exciting for how little we actually did and how weak the hardware was. You were just happy to have it.

>what is inflation

People leech on social security today because social security system forces them to leech. If they try to contribute and try to succeed, they are punished and social security will be cut off.

Leeching from safety net is a systematic issue baked into current system because we punish people who are trying to succeed.

>wages lower
>robots take over
>etc etc
It will already happen regardless of UBI. UBI is merely a revamping/restructuring of current satefy net to become more efficient/productive instead of destructive.

>UBI is there to cut off the bureaucratic process and simplify the process.
Yes, but the money is still coming from the taxpayer’s pocket. No hand-waving will change this fact.

And tax payers will be paid back with UBI. For 90% of the population, this is a net positive/neutral change.

>i cant imagine it actually being super useful for the dumbest people, since they'll blow the money anyway
Right, but it will give them a sense of security. Imagine if the poor single parents had more time to their kids instead of letting their kids be in gangs/trouble. Imagine if the kids had a playstation/computer at home instead of trying to be a thief/gangster, etc.

I personally think UBI's benefit will be much greater than imagined simply due to reduction in crime rate. The world's problem revolve mainly around lack of resources/money. But however that takes a long time/generational change. I personally think UBI is a force multiplier for capitalism rather than a drain. Productive people = productive economy/society/etc. To be productive requires sense of security/safety first and foremost.

>UBI because of automation
And now watch the conservatards barging in claiming UBI is communist and will create inflation, disregarding the fact that automation will balance it by destroying the job income of a growing part of the population

Way too different in culture. It would be unrecognizable/alien. Just the shift from today to 40 years in the future would be very different. Compare today to the 70s. Or today to medieval era. You would not fit in even if you were the smartest man on earth today, Kanye West.

That’s as retarded as plugging an outlet into its own socket.

>Friends
Just no.

Economy isn't a closed system. The outlet->socket loop is a closed system thus violates the laws of thermodynamics.

Economy of a nation, a city is not just the local city/nation, but also the neighbors, the earth, the sun, etc. Thus we can functionally "forever" expand our economy if we can increase our ability to harness resources.

I don't want to go back to a certain era, but I do want certain ideas and concepts that have been abandoned for the madness of today to return, for example, MOTHERFUCKING PRIVACY WHERE SANE PEOPLE REJECT THE IDEA OF FUCKING CARRYING AROUND A GODDAMN TRACKING DEVICE/ANTI-PRIVACY TOY GODDAMN PHONE.

fuck you i liked Friends

When Earth didn't exist yet

most people on crime like to be criminal. People doing it "for survival" are not that much because when they find something less risky to do they stop doing it.

Most criminals like doing crime, do not dilute yourself.

I want to go back

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-21-13-05-24.png (1280x720, 789K)

Most criminals are just one-time petty criminals doing it either for "survival" or from pure ignorance. The career criminals are a minority and they commit heinous crimes throughout their lives. But I suspect this is just a product of prison system. They have too much freedom/interactions in prison. I prefer the Japanese style prison. Safe/secure/structured. There is no room for horse play and no room for breeding gang banger culture there.

>Maybe we'll finally see a mars colony

Who exactly do you think is going to do that?

I guess you are thinking that India or China is going to do it?

LOL wow, universal basic income is not in anyway shape or form altruistic.

Maybe its me, but I wont be attached to petty nationalism if human set foot on another planet and start creating structures there.

God damn it, answer the fucking question, who do you think is going to do it?

The reason why you won't answer is because you know it is NO ONE, you just think and HOPE that some individual will magically emerge from the sludge and do it.

There is zero reason to think that will actually occur.

You can't KNOW about the future. We can only make predictions based on current understanding of the situation. There's US gov and US private org that has the most potential. China next, then India, EU, Japan, etc in that order.

90's

1347-1351 would be the best time

I miss the 90s and early 00s. Just look at all that soul in that picture.

Attached: first.man.2018.proper.1080p.bluray.x264-drones.mkv_snapshot_00.12.46.849.jpg (1920x1080, 704K)

2080.

The 90s tech boom. I had a good job then. But no longer.

imagine a village.
in the village there are the hunters, who produce goods, and the NEETs, who produce nothing.
what reason the hunters have to give from what they produce to the NEETs?

Attached: 1562615272461.jpg (480x480, 32K)

Not even joking.

Attached: cavemen for ants.jpg (300x200, 21K)

The entire world will be like a third world country with that mindset.

sex

ultimate kino

How so?

>Who exactly do you think is going to do that?
Elon Musk within 10 years

>The entire world will be like a third world country

That is the future of the globe.

No one is going to mars and they sure as hell are not going to be colonizing it.

what happened in 2011 user?

this, because i could take all the land if I have resistance to it or die, one or the other

Attached: 608px-Four_Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse_(by_Arnaldo_Dell'Ira,_project_of_mosaic_1939-1940).jpg (608x600, 127K)

1988-1998
literally the peak of all human happiness

I just want to be in a different, more advanced period. "Fitting in" has never been my strong suit, anyhow. Maybe the culture shock would become something like wonder and admiration.

This is assuming that people want to work. If you give most people with shit life skills a $1000 stipend, you won't increase their quality of life at all, it just means that they're going to work less.

a woman I work with considers her husband's $2600 a month GI bill stipend to be their primary income and the job is just "spending money" despite the clear and obvious flaws with that reasoning, and is going to get fired if she doesn't show up to her shift one more time. Welfae doesn't make people work more, it makes people work less, especially if the welfare isn't good enough, because then they can just blame their lack of success on the government instead of facing up to their own laziness

Nah, that was just when mass media's job was to project an image of a positive future, because the ruling class was afraid the lack of a Soviet boogeyman in light of glasnost and the fall of the Soviet union would make the population catch on to the fact that it's entirely a projection

The internet made the mass media machine less useful, which is why the mass media has been in full blown "please panic the world is ending" mode for the last 5 years, because they're realizing their complacency in the 90s fucked their plan up long term because the internet was a much bigger threat than they thought

>90s
>good music

A women who leeches off of her husband will always leech off of her husband. Should they get divorced, she will take 50% of his wealth and additional child support money. Its not comparable. She wont ever have to work. But she does anyway on top of what she already leeches. For "spending money." Mainly because the 2600 GI is not enough, thus she needs more to cater her desires.

youtube.com/watch?v=L_jWHffIx5E

That's some strong box

1920

what movie m8? looks pretty good

2001

Attached: mommy.jpg (969x648, 105K)

youtube.com/watch?v=bS5P_LAqiVg

man, those socks look comfy