Andrew Yang talks about the effect of automation on majority men jobs and mass shootings

[–]mtcapri 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[S] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

I see.

Yeah, while the problem of automation and male joblessness is a huge and looming issue, I'm not entirely sure UBI is the best policy for tackling it. Working in the community mental health field has made me realize that the "culture of dependency" Republicans talk about is actually a very real thing that liberals tend to minimize and/or pretend doesn't exist. In my experience, not only does it exist, it's very prevalent in poor urban neighborhoods. While I am for creating social safety nets, I tend to feel that providing material needs is better than providing cash or cash equivalents.

However, with the unemployed trucker population, this is less likely to be an issue. I suspect more of them will look to get other low-skill jobs, rather than settle for a government check.

I dunno. I do feel that welfare needs to be improved and expanded upon, but I don't like the idea that our attempts to do so will further the spread of the generation-transferring complacency I've seen in the population I work with.

[–]SuperSpaceGaming 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Hi, I'm a conservative Yang supporter here to bring another point of view. The culture of dependency is 100% a real thing, but its not because of the nature of humans like a lot of people think, its an issue with the nature of welfare systems. The problem with things like food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc. is it provides a disincentive to improve your financial situation. When you get past a certain level of income you lose your benefits, essentially making improving your financial situation pointless. UBI doesn't suffer from the same issues since its universal and doesn't discriminate against levels of wealth. As for providing material needs over cash, I've seen a couple good arguments against this. The first is how much money you save by removing the bureaucracy of interviews, transportation, and fraud prevention for all these various means tested welfare systems. Another good argument is the inefficiency of government. Basically, the government is probably one of the worst entities to determine what you need to survive.

[–]mtcapri 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

That's a good point about UBI not necessarily being as susceptible to the dependency issue, because it's universal. I hadn't thought about that.

From what I've seen, the dependency issue happened due to the normalization of receiving welfare in very impoverished communities. When the programs first started, there was a stigma attached to receiving money from the government, and that provided incentive for most people to either not accept it or work hard to stop needing it. Over time though—and I think this had a lot to do with housing the poorest people in the same places/complexes—it became normalized in those communities. Now, children grow up seeing their parents and all their neighbors getting by via this system, and their parents just automatically sign them up when they come of age.

That's the main type I've seen, but there's a second that has resulted in the disability benefits system. Basically, people on disability often don't want to risk going back to work, because "you can't get fired from your check." Ironically, because it takes people so damn long (often years) to get disability benefits, they don't want to give them up, because getting them again if it turns out they can't work is such a nightmare.

Those two different issues with different causes that require different solutions. But, to be honest, I'm damned if I know what those solutions should be. I think switching out material goods for cash is a good start, but that comes with its own set of issues too (e.g. people having allergies to certain food items or needing specialized diets for other medical reasons). Also, a lot of people I know who receive food stamps cash them in illegally at willing stores for ridiculously low returns (the "standard" rate where I am is 75% of the cash value of the stamps). Why is this done? Simple: they get their food from pantries and other programs, and prefer to spend the cash on other things and...get this: takeout. I've run through how idiotic this is with the very people who do it, and they've confirmed it hurts them in the long run, but they keep doing it.

I suppose my concern about UBI is that, while it may never create a normalized culture of dependency to the same extent that welfare has, it may very well further normalize the culture of dependency that already exists among welfare recipients and cause it to grow even more.

[–]SuperSpaceGaming 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I suppose my concern about UBI is that, while it may never create a normalized culture of dependency to the same extent that welfare has, it may very well further normalize the culture of dependency that already exists among welfare recipients and cause it to grow even more.

This is a valid concern, but I'd like to try to convince you that this wouldn't be the case. For example, with your takeout story. People game the system like that and waste part of their benefits because they've been given arbitrary rules by government officials who have no idea what they need. Add that to welfare trap I discussed in my previous comment and you get a system that entraps people into poverty and leaves them with no option but to take the welfare. When you remove the ceiling that welfare creates and provide a floor for everyone to stand on no matter what happens, you give them the stability and foundation they need to build themselves out of poverty.

[–]mtcapri 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

People game the system like that and waste part of their benefits because they’ve been given arbitrary rules by government officials who have no idea what they need.

Mrm...no, I disagree with that. The folks doing this are buying what they want, not what they need. Most of my patients have newer phones than mine, and they get a new one every six months or so. And yes, I’ve asked, they willingly get into debt, sacrificing their rent payment for their phone, and then apply for a debt-forgiveness program run the city I work in.

I hear what you’re saying about UBI not having the same “ceiling” problems as welfare/benefits though. I’m not worried about it creating a welfare pandemic or anything, but I do worry that—for communities that are already benefit-dependent—this is a step in the wrong direction.

Maybe we conceptualize the problem differently. From what I’ve seen, the issue isn’t really that they’re afraid of losing their benefits most of the time (although again, disability is a different matter), it’s that they were never raised to think that having a job is “normal” and that being on welfare isn’t supposed to be a permanent thing. Then there’s the problem cited by a lot of my clients: manyof them tried working once or twice, because they know they can make more money by doing so, but didn’t like how (a) jobs are stressful and (b) it cut them off from the daytime social life they’d become accustomed to.

The problem, as I see it, is that there’s an entire subculture built around living off of welfare and hustling at this point. It’s not really the system keeping them on it: it’s the culture. Aspects of the system contribute, but the culture is the real culprit now—it’s a snowball we allowed to turn into a snow boulder and now I fear it’s too big to stop.

Anyway, none of that negates the idea that UBI might be a good thing for the populace as a whole, I just worry about it compounding a problem in our poorest communities and potentially causing it to grow. It only takes a generation or two of families in a certain neighborhood living off of nothing but UBI and other benefits for it to become normalized, and these folks are going to naturally be grouped together due to their economic status. So, that’s my concern: that the problem grew out of normalization of receiving welfare, and the same could happen if living off of UBI becomes normalized.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Mrm...no, I disagree with that. The folks doing this are buying what they want, not what they need. Most of my patients have newer phones than mine, and they get a new one every six months or so. And yes, I’ve asked, they willingly get into debt, sacrificing their rent payment for their phone, and then apply for a debt-forgiveness program run the city I work in.

I personally doubt that's super common amongst welfare people. This is a sign of someone who's dependent on always having the new stuff (insecurity, as in wanting to fit in so bad they can't do without), and deathly dependent on their phone.

I'm on welfare. Can you believe I don't have a cellphone, at all?

Maybe we conceptualize the problem differently. From what I’ve seen, the issue isn’t really that they’re afraid of losing their benefits most of the time (although again, disability is a different matter), it’s that they were never raised to think that having a job is “normal” and that being on welfare isn’t supposed to be a permanent thing.

We ought to review this normal. Working to live leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Of course, we should encourage more than just idleness, but saying that anything not monetarily productive is a waste, is also bad. With UBI, people could realize themselves, be artists who couldn't normally 'live on it', full-time. Have a small-time business without worrying about a small week/month killing your business. Work from home, be your own boss stuff, too. And a lot more parents going part time while kids are young (maybe both of them), without feeling like they're going below the poverty line the entire time.

[–]mtcapri 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I personally doubt that's super common amongst welfare people. This is a sign of someone who's dependent on always having the new stuff (insecurity, as in wanting to fit in so bad they can't do without), and deathly dependent on their phone.

I can only speak for the population I work with (inner city people getting mental health treatment of some kind), but it's pretty common. And the reasons vary, but a lot of the time, they either lose or break their phones; they're not replacing them out of vanity, but when they get a replacement, they never go for the cheap ones, they always have to have a Galaxy or an iPhone or something. My understanding is that the key feature they're looking for is screen resolution and size, because they use their phones to watch movies.

And no, this isn't due to these folks having mental health issues. This is a cultural phenomenon, not something that's happening as a result of them being manic or psychotic or something. I've had enough conversations with my patients to know they feel this is normal for the communities they come from too, so I know it's not just limited to the population I see.

We ought to review this normal. Working to live leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Of course, we should encourage more than just idleness, but saying that anything not monetarily productive is a waste, is also bad. With UBI, people could realize themselves, be artists who couldn't normally 'live on it', full-time. Have a small-time business without worrying about a small week/month killing your business. Work from home, be your own boss stuff, too. And a lot more parents going part time while kids are young (maybe both of them), without feeling like they're going below the poverty line the entire time.

LOL, the folks I'm talking about are not spending their time pursuing noble artistic endeavors or starting their own businesses. Mostly, their aren't doing much productive at all with that time, except sometimes raising families. And they hustle, there's a lot of that. I'm all for people finding alternatives to the 9-5 drudge, but that's not what's going on here.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

My understanding is that the key feature they're looking for is screen resolution and size, because they use their phones to watch movies.

I have a computer. In no danger of losing it, or forgetting it somewhere. And I can watch HD, and technically 4K on it. There was a time when phones were used as phones... Why not get a laptop if the idea is to have a mobile thing to watch movies? Less danger to lose it, and you won't pay 3/4 of the price on other features.

I've had enough conversations with my patients to know they feel this is normal for the communities they come from too, so I know it's not just limited to the population I see.

It's common for people to have phones here. But not to go in debts to get the latest ones.

LOL, the folks I'm talking about are not spending their time pursuing noble artistic endeavors or starting their own businesses. Mostly, their aren't doing much productive at all with that time, except sometimes raising families. And they hustle, there's a lot of that. I'm all for people finding alternatives to the 9-5 drudge, but that's not what's going on here.

I'd be fine with some not being productive. Blogging, chatting, gaming all the time. Watching movies, whatever. But UBI standards of living are lower. Most people don't accept to cut in all their luxury crap just for more leisure time. Not to mention the ton of people who can't stomach not being busy all the time, or not being useful.

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SuperSpaceGaming 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]insane_gravy 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cameronlcowan 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]highmrk 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Andrew Yang talks about the effect of automation on majority men jobs and mass shootings

Crosspost "Andrew Yang talks about the effect of automation on majority men jobs and mass shootings" from /r/MensRights:

Comments

Title	Andrew Yang talks about the effect of automation on majority men jobs and mass shootings
Author	serpentineeyelash
Upvotes	15
Comments	19
Date	September 4, 2019 3:35 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/czfia9/andrew_yang_talks_about_the_effect_of_automation/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/andrew-yang-talks-about-the-effect-of-automation.1064522 https://theredarchive.com/post/1064522