• Changetheview@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Legal basis for suing a company that uses another company’s product/creations without approval seems like a fairly pretty straightforward intellectual property issue.

    Legal basis for increased taxes on revenue from AI or automation in general could be created in the same way that any tax is created: through legislation. Income tax didn’t exist before, now it does. Tax breaks for mortgage interest didn’t use it exist, now it does. Levying higher taxes on companies that rely heavily on automated systems and creating a UBI out of the revenue might not exist right now, but it can, if the right people are voted in to pass the right laws.

    • tony_lasagna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think a UBI makes sense, for many people it will just be extra money in their pocket to spend which continues the endless inflation in prices until the gain disappears.

      More efficient targeting of benefits to those who need it with that money would actually help reduce inequality

      • RatzChatsubo@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The idea is that UBI would give people time for the working class to pursue passions, spend more money, and enable more people to pursue entrepreneurship in the country. All things that in turn would benefit society and the arts.

      • Irisos@lemmy.umainfo.live
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s more that UBI is just not financially possible for any country.

        I live in a country with the highest tax rate on the continent and with just 20% of our population as pensioners, the situation is just getting worse and worse even though 49% of the population has a tax rate between 25 and 50% (+13% from welfare taxes). Just with this small percentage, we are spending 20% of our budget in pensions. More than any other area by at least 5% of our national budget.

        If the state now had to pay an UBI to 69% of our population on top of this, the very minimum to pay off the UBI without going bankrupt would be to sell off the free healthcare and public transport in their entirety. And I’m assuming a small UBI of 500€/month (Not even enough to rent a 1 room appartement with utilities in some areas).

        UBI would destroy any country’s budget for what? Landlord increasing rent to match the UBI, corporations increasing prices to match the inflation and people wasting that money when it could have been put to use to increase renewable energy production, improve education, …

        UBI is only a good idea in paper and you only need to look at the public expenses of most European countries + have a basic understanding of capitalist greed to see it.

      • PlebsicleMcGee@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        continues the endless inflation

        UBI would likely lead to a decrease in wages or at least a period of stagnation as it would be less important to employees. As far as I’ve heard long run it shouldn’t hurt

    • tony_lasagna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think a UBI makes sense, for many people it will just be extra money in their pocket to spend which continues the endless inflation in prices until the gain disappears.

      More efficient targeting of benefits to those who need it with that money would actually help reduce inequality

      • smokeythebear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Every single example of means testing has been more expensive than just distributing the benefits to the people that ask for them.