Is a Fully-Automated Society with Universal Basic Income Really Desirable?
The concept of a fully-automated society, where everyone receives a universal basic income (UBI), has gained significant attention in recent years. This utopian vision imagines a world where automation takes over all labor-intensive tasks, leaving humans with little to no need for physical or mental effort. However, such a scenario raises critical questions: would this truly be desirable for humanity?
The Dangers of a Fully-Automated Society
If society were 100% automated, with everything from agriculture, manufacturing, service industries, and home repairs being handled by machines, what would happen to humanity? The key issue lies in the human need for purpose and achievement. Without these, humans might degenerate into lifeless entities, fostering a path to extinction. Dependency on robots and AI would strip humans of their identity and intrinsic value. This realization is not mere speculation; it points to a stark future where humans become merely consumers in a system devoid of genuine human interaction and contribution.
Why a Universal Basic Income Might Be Cheaper?
While the ethical and existential concerns loom large, there is a possibility that a fully-automated society could be cheaper in terms of governance and welfare. The distribution of a UBI could be integrated into existing governmental systems, such as the IRS in the US. With the IRS already tracking wages, it could easily implement the UBI through existing channels. Furthermore, this automated distribution could eliminate the need for numerous welfare programs, such as food stamps, unemployment benefits, and homeless support. At both the state and federal levels, the consolidation of these programs could result in significant cost savings, trimming unnecessary expenses like civil servant salaries, pension funds, and redundant administrative buildings.
The Dark Side of a UBI-Driven Society
While the economic benefits seem promising, there is a darker side to consider. A society where humans receive a basic income without contributing to society might be managed by an AI-driven system. Such a system could determine the worth of each individual, allocate resources based on perceived contributions, and even make decisions about the population and life span. This scenario could lead to a dystopian world where humans are seen as consumers rather than contributors, with the AI acting as the ultimate decision-maker. The movie If You Wisk to Live in Such Utopia, released in 1976, explores a similar theme, offering a glimpse into a future where humans are valued solely by their worth to the system.
Conclusion
While the concept of a fully-automated society with UBI raises intriguing economic and logistical possibilities, it is important to consider the broader implications for human existence and societal values. A society where humans exist solely as consumers, managed by an automated system, is not necessarily a desirable one. The ethical and existential questions that arise must be carefully considered before embarking on such a path.