El fin del trabajo

[visillófilas pepitófagas]

https://youtu.be/PEoNXUJdcWg

Mujer norcoreana dirigiendo el tráfico en un cruce sin ningún tráfico.

¡Ya están los asiáticos plagiándonos los modelos de negocio!

[muyuu]

[Cadavre Exquis]

Aunque es una noticia que data de hace unos meses, creo que es relevante, sobre todo a raíz de de los últimos vídeos que la gente de Cruise ha subido a su canal de YouTube.

GM’s self-driving division Cruise raises another $1.15 billion
Post-money valuation is now $19 billion
By Andrew J. Hawkins | @andyjayhawk May 7, 2019, 9:04am EDT

Cruise self-driving test vehicle navigates the urban streets of San Francisco, California. (Photo by Karl Nielsen) Photo by Karl Nielsen

Cruise Automation, the self-driving division of General Motors, announced on Tuesday that it has secured a $1.15 billion investment, raising its post-money valuation to an eye-popping $19 billion.

The money was raised from a “group comprising institutional investors, including funds and accounts advised by T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc., and existing partners General Motors, SoftBank Vision Fund and Honda,” Cruise said in a statement.

It’s another enormous boost for GM’s Cruise. Last May, it announced a $2.25 billion investment from the SoftBank Vision Fund, a major venture investment effort that was started by the Japanese tech giant in 2016. Then, in October, GM said it would team up with Honda to design a purpose-built self-driving car. The Japanese automaker said it would devote $2 billion to the effort over 12 years, including a $750 million equity investment in Cruise.

GM bought Cruise in 2016 for $1 billion to jump-start its self-driving efforts. The company has said it plans to deploy its fully driverless cars, without steering wheel or pedals, for commercial ride-hailing use as early as 2019.

By committing to rolling out fully driverless cars in a shortened time frame, GM is seeking to outmaneuver rivals both old and new in the increasingly hyper-competitive race to build and deploy robot cars. Ford has said it will build an autonomous car without a steering wheel or pedals by 2021, while Waymo launched its first commercial ride-hailing service in Phoenix (albeit in a more scaled-back fashion than originally anticipated).

There was a flurry of partnerships and investments around self-driving cars in 2016 and 2017, but that activity has since mostly died down, leading some critics to claim that the technology now finds itself in the “trough of disillusionment.”

To be sure, there are still huge sums of money exchanging hands despite this lull. There was the Cruise-SoftBank deal in May and the Cruise-Honda deal in October. In August, Toyota and Uber said they would join forces to build self-driving cars in a deal that involved the Japanese automaker committing $500 million to the ride-hailing giant. In April 2019, Uber secured another $1 billion from SoftBank, Toyota, and Denso.

There may be disillusionment in this trough, but there are huge piles of money, too.

Tal y como se explica en la página de Wikipedia correspondiente a la empresa, GM Cruise LLC, Cruise Automation o, simplemente, Cruise, es una empresa que fue fundada en 2013 con el objetivo de desarrollar tecnología relacionada con coches autónomos. Inicialmente parece que se dedicaban al desarrollo de "kits" para que la gente pudiese añadir capacidades de conducción autónoma a sus propios vehículos, pero en marzo de 2016, cuando contaba con tan solo 40 empleados, fue adquirida por General Motors por un precio indeterminado (se rumorea que entre $500M y $1.000M) y, a partir de entonces, se centra solo en el desarrollo del software de conducción autónoma.

Parece que en septiembre de de ese mismo año (2016), ya contaba con 100 empleados, y, en 2017, General Motors anunció que iba a invertir otros $14M para ampliar el desarrollo de la empresa en California con la previsión de aumentar la plantilla de Cruise en 1.163 empleados a tiempo completo para 2021.

En mayo de 2018 Softbank anunció su intención de invertir 2.250M en la compañía al tiempo que la propia General Motors incrementaba su inversión en otros $1.100M.

En octubre de 2018 Honda anunció su intención de invertir $750M con el objetivo de invertir otros 2.000M a largo de los siguientes 12 años.

En noviembre de 2018, el entonces presidente de General Motors, Dan Ammann, dejó su puesto en GM para convertirse en el CEO de Cruise.

Les dejo a continuación un vídeo de hace un par de semanas en el que muestran en qué punto se encuentra ahora mismo el software de conducción autónoma que, en las concurridas calles de San Francisco, ha de enfrentarse a todo tipo de obstáculos.

How Cruise Self-Driving Cars Navigate Double-Parked Vehicles

Saludos.

[Cadavre Exquis]

Supngo que radio de acción de los coches estará limitado a las afueras de Phoenix y, aunque en el e-mail se dice lo contrario, es muy probable que aunque no haya nadie sentado al volante, al menos inicialmente viaje un empleado de Waymo en el coche. Lo que si está claro es que es un paso más en esta carrera por ser los primeros en poner en el mercado un servicio de transporte de pasajeros basado en coches autónomos.

Waymo To Customers: 'Completely Driverless Waymo Cars Are On the Way'
Posted by BeauHD on Wednesday October 09, 2019 @11:30PM from the mark-your-calendar dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch:

Waymo, the autonomous vehicle business under Alphabet, sent an email to customers of its ride-hailing app that their next trip might not have a human safety driver behind the wheel, according to a copy of the email that was posted on Reddit. The email entitled "Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way" was sent to customers that use its ride-hailing app in the suburbs of Phoenix.

Both the early rider program and Waymo One service use self-driving Chrysler Pacifica minivans to shuttle Phoenix residents in a geofenced area that covers several suburbs including Chandler and Tempe. All of these "self-driving rides" have a human safety driver behind the wheel. A driverless ride is what it sounds like. No safety driver behind the wheel, although a Waymo employee would likely be present in the vehicle initially.

Una captura de pantalla del e-mail que han recibido los usuarios de Waymo:

Saludos.

[Saturio]

Supngo que radio de acción de los coches estará limitado a las afueras de Phoenix y, aunque en el e-mail se dice lo contrario, es muy probable que aunque no haya nadie sentado al volante, al menos inicialmente viaje un empleado de Waymo en el coche. Lo que si está claro es que es un paso más en esta carrera por ser los primeros en poner en el mercado un servicio de transporte de pasajeros basado en coches autónomos.

Waymo To Customers: 'Completely Driverless Waymo Cars Are On the Way'
Posted by BeauHD on Wednesday October 09, 2019 @11:30PM from the mark-your-calendar dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch:

Waymo, the autonomous vehicle business under Alphabet, sent an email to customers of its ride-hailing app that their next trip might not have a human safety driver behind the wheel, according to a copy of the email that was posted on Reddit. The email entitled "Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way" was sent to customers that use its ride-hailing app in the suburbs of Phoenix.

Both the early rider program and Waymo One service use self-driving Chrysler Pacifica minivans to shuttle Phoenix residents in a geofenced area that covers several suburbs including Chandler and Tempe. All of these "self-driving rides" have a human safety driver behind the wheel. A driverless ride is what it sounds like. No safety driver behind the wheel, although a Waymo employee would likely be present in the vehicle initially.

Una captura de pantalla del e-mail que han recibido los usuarios de Waymo:

Saludos.

A pesar de ser un Tesla hater, tengo que decir que creo que Waymo está equivocado y Tesla está acertando en la carrera por el coche autónomo.
Pero es un debate muy interesante.

[Cadavre Exquis]

A pesar de ser un Tesla hater, tengo que decir que creo que Waymo está equivocado y Tesla está acertando en la carrera por el coche autónomo.
Pero es un debate muy interesante.

Efectivamente, el del coche autónomo es un asunto muy interesante que está llamado a cambiar la sociedad en la que vivimos, al igual que la introducción del coche lo hizo en su momento (cfr. "La máquina que cambió el mundo")

Elon Musk está apostando por que el coche eléctrico sustituirá al vehículo de combustión interna, mientas que Waymo está apostando a que el coche autónomo hará que tener un coche en propiedad deje de tener sentido.

A nivel técnico, Elon Musk está convencido de que, al igual que un humano puede conducir un coche basándose principalmente en el sentido de la vista y el oído, lo único que necesita un coche para poder ser autónomo son cámaras (unque actualmente los Tesla montan 8 cámaras, doce sensores de ultrasonidos y un radar en la parte frontal del vehículo), por el contario, la gente de Waymo cree que no tiene sentido limitarse a utilizar el equivalente al sentido de la vista y que, lo lógico, es disponer de otros sentidos de los que carecemos los humanos como puede ser el LIDAR logrando con ello una máquina con sentidos "aumentados"(*) con lo que realmente un humano estaría en desventaja frente a un coche autónomo a la hora de conducir.

Saludos.

(*) Watch a Waymo self-driving car test its sensors in a haboob

[Hynkel]

Efectivamente, el del coche autónomo es un asunto muy interesante que está llamado a cambiar la sociedad en la que vivimos, al igual que la introducción del coche lo hizo en su momento (cfr. "La máquina que cambió el mundo")

Elon Musk está apostando por que el coche eléctrico sustituirá al vehículo de combustión interna, mientas que Waymo está apostando a que el coche autónomo hará que tener un coche en propiedad deje de tener sentido.

¿Qué diferencia hay entre subirse al autobús urbano o a un coche autónomo si vives en ciudad?

La popularización del coche sí que fue una revolución porque permitió a cualquiera poder tener la casa y el trabajo en prácticamente cualquier sitio dentro de un radio. Y esto era esencial en ciudades de provincias donde el transporte público no llega al nivel de una gran ciudad. Pero no hay tanta revolución cuando en el fondo se sigue tratando del mismo movimiento pendular diario en las grandes ciudades. El ciclo casa-trabajo-casa.

Todas estas elucubraciones sobre el coche autónomo olvidan un detalle fundamental: es carísimo mantener las infraestructuras de una gran ciudad, y aún más una mole de 20 m2 por persona. En la era de la informática resulta absurdo pretender mantener esquemas del siglo pasado donde el trabajo presencial ya no siempre es estrictamente necesario. Pero entre que no hay cultura de trabajar en remoto, y que hay intereses inmobiliarios en juego, esa transición o va para largo o se hará a la fuerza cuando la necesidad lo imponga. Como todas las grandes transformaciones en la historia humana.

Si vuelve un ciclo de dejar la gran ciudad y cambiarla por la pequeña o el pueblo, el viraje en las necesidades será drástico. Y el coche en propiedad recuperaría valor.

[Cadavre Exquis]

¿Qué diferencia hay entre subirse al autobús urbano o a un coche autónomo si vives en ciudad?

La popularización del coche sí que fue una revolución porque permitió a cualquiera poder tener la casa y el trabajo en prácticamente cualquier sitio dentro de un radio. Y esto era esencial en ciudades de provincias donde el transporte público no llega al nivel de una gran ciudad. Pero no hay tanta revolución cuando en el fondo se sigue tratando del mismo movimiento pendular diario en las grandes ciudades. El ciclo casa-trabajo-casa.

Todas estas elucubraciones sobre el coche autónomo olvidan un detalle fundamental: es carísimo mantener las infraestructuras de una gran ciudad, y aún más una mole de 20 m2 por persona.

El coche autónomo es algo más que "un simple coche sin conductor". En mi opinión, el cambio importante es el relativo al vehículo en propiedad.

Todo el mundo sabe que un avión que no está volando está perdiendo dinero y esa es la razón por la que las aerolíneas optimizan el uso de los aviones hasta el límite. El termino técnico es block hours y varía bastante en función del tipo de avión y los trayectos que realiza, pero hay aerolíneas cuyos aviones empleados en trayectos de larga distancia pasan más de 12 horas al día en vuelo, lo que, evidentemente, supone un porcentaje de uso de más del 50%. Si se realiza este mismo cálculo para un vehículo personal, el resultado es sensiblemente inferior (un uso de un par de horas al día -aunque en general será menos- supondría un 8,33% de "eficiencia"). En el caso de un taxi o un VTC, el porcentaje de uso aumenta sensiblemente (en caso de que la licencia del vehículo sea compartida puede llegar a ser superior al 50%). Si pensamos en el caso de un vehículo autónomo, el porcentaje de uso se dispararía hasta alcanzar los límites físicos del mimo y, en caso de tratarse de un vehículo eléctrico, el motor apenas sufre desgaste y el mantenimiento sería principalmente el cambio de neumáticos y, cada cierto número de kilómetros, el de la batería (y las últimas noticias aparecidas al respecto -ya comentadas en este hilo- hablan de baterías con duraciones estimadas de 1 millón de millas ó 1,6 millones de kilómetros).

Ahora mismo en grandes ciudades como Madrid existen empresas tipo Car2go, Emov, Zity, etc. que han supuesto una pequeña revolución en el transporte, permiten moverse por el centro de la ciudad de forma rápida y cómoda sin tener que preocuparse de restricciones por contaminación, llenar el depósito de combustible y, por supuesto, del aparcamiento (pueden estacionarse en zona verde o azul de forma gratuita). Efectivamente la gente que usa esos vehículos podría decidir moverse por la ciudad en autobús, pero si existen empresas como las mencionadas anteriormente, es porque hay demanda de ese tipo de servicio.

Con la llegada del coche autónomo la rentabilidad de este tipo de negocio se dispararía ya que no tendrían que abonar tasas de aparcamiento, pero, sobre todo, no tendrían que pagar a empleados para recoger los vehículos con batería baja para llevarlos a los puntos de recarga pues serían los propios vehículos los que se dirigirían automáticamente a los puntos de recarga cuando lo estimasen apropiado. La eficiencia de uso de los vehículos aumentaría también considerablemente ya que nunca estarían parados (por lo que no harían falta tantas plazas de aparcamiento), estarían o bien transportando pasajeros o bien yendo a por el siguiente, y, todo ello, bajo el control de un sistema informático que optimizaría las rutas de todos los vehículos, lo que permitiría, a su vez, reducir considerablemente el tamaño de la flota de vehículos necesarios que, a su vez redundaría en un menor número de vehículos circulando por la ciudad que aliviaría las congestiones de tráfico. En suma, sería un círculo virtuoso del que saldría beneficiado todo el mundo.

En resumen, que pretender mantener un sistema de transporte que precisa de una máquina de 2.500 Kg de peso para mover 80 Kg. con una eficiencia de uso del 8,33% es un absurdo se mire como se mire y el vehículo autónomo permitiría eliminar la necesidad de tener un coche en propiedad para una mayoría de la población.

En la era de la informática resulta absurdo pretender mantener esquemas del siglo pasado donde el trabajo presencial ya no siempre es estrictamente necesario. Pero entre que no hay cultura de trabajar en remoto, y que hay intereses inmobiliarios en juego, esa transición o va para largo o se hará a la fuerza cuando la necesidad lo imponga. Como todas las grandes transformaciones en la historia humana.

Aunque esto se saldría bastante del tema, estoy de acuerdo en que en el siglo xxi muchos trabajos -sobre todo aquellos relacionados con IT- se pueden realizar a distancia y, aunque ciertamente de forma más lenta de lo que sería deseable, las empresas -sobre todo las relacionadas con el sector IT- van asimilando la posibilidad de que sus empleados trabajen a distancia. Pero, aunque soy un firme defensor del teletrabajo, también creo que las limitaciones tecnológicas actuales imponen todavía ciertas limitaciones y, algunas cosas, siguen siendo más farragosas cuando se está trabajando a distancia que cuando se está trabajando en una oficina y puedes levantarte a discutir algún tema con un compañero en persona, pero estoy seguro de que futuros avances en realidad aumentada ayudarán a eliminar o, al menos, a reducir sensiblemente, estas limitaciones.

Si vuelve un ciclo de dejar la gran ciudad y cambiarla por la pequeña o el pueblo, el viraje en las necesidades será drástico. Y el coche en propiedad recuperaría valor.

Yo particularmente no veo que eso se vaya a producir (al menos en la próxima década) y, aunque como argumentaba usted al principio, mantener las infraestructuras de una gran ciudad tiene sin duda unos costes muy altos, supongo que aun así, el coste será más barato que proporcionar los mismos servicios a una población de similar tamaño pero que se halle dispersa geográficamente.

Saludos.

[Cadavre Exquis]

Ha llegado el día...

Waymo's Completely Driverless Cars Are Now Picking Up Passengers
Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday November 03, 2019 @03:34AM from the ghost-chauffers dept.

"Congrats! This car is all yours, with no one up front," announces the cheery pop-up notification from Waymo's app. "This ride will be different. With no one else in the car, Waymo will do all the driving. Enjoy this free ride on us!"

TechCrunch got one of the first completely-driverless rides as a journalist, writes long-time Slashdot reader galgon. "It appears per Waymo's annoucement earlier this month that driverless rides really are ramping up in the Chandler, AZ area." From TechCrunch's report:

Moments later, an empty Chrysler Pacifica minivan appears and navigates its way to my location near a park in Chandler, the Phoenix suburb where Waymo has been testing its autonomous vehicles since 2016.... Waymo wouldn't share specific numbers on just how many driverless rides it would be giving, only saying that it continues to ramp up its operations. Here's what we do know. There are hundreds of customers in its early rider program, all of whom will have access to this offering. These early riders can't request a fully driverless ride. Instead, they are matched with a driverless car if it's nearby. There are, of course, caveats to this milestone. Waymo is conducting these "completely driverless" rides in a controlled geofenced environment. Early rider program members are people who are selected based on what ZIP code they live in and are required to sign NDAs. And the rides are free, at least for now.

Still, as I buckle my seatbelt and take stock of the empty driver's seat, it's hard not to be struck, at least for a fleeting moment, by the achievement... Seeing an empty driver's seat at 45 miles per hour, or a steering wheel spinning in empty space as it navigates suburban traffic, feels inescapably surreal... There were moments where the self-driving system's driving impressed, like the way it caught an unprotected left turn just as the traffic signal turned yellow or how its acceleration matched surrounding traffic. The vehicle seemed to even have mastered the more human-like driving skill of crawling forward at a stop sign to signal its intent. Only a few typical quirks, like moments of overly cautious traffic spacing and overactive path planning, betrayed the fact that a computer was in control. A more typical rider, specifically one who doesn't regularly practice their version of the driving Turing Test, might not have even noticed them...

Given how fundamentally autonomous mobility could impact our society and cities, it's reassuring to know that one of the technology's leading developers is taking the time to understand and adapt to them.

The article also notes that "developing the technologies and protocols that allow a driverless Waymo to detect and pull over for emergency response vehicles and even allow emergency services to take over control was a complex task that required extensive testing and collaboration with local authorities."

The original submission also points out that the first video of a completely driver-less Waymo car has now surfaced on YouTube. "Waymo has produced several videos over the years without safety drivers but actual driverless operations have been very minimal and never photographed in the wild."

Until now...

Saludos.

[Greco]

Me lo acaba de sugerir youtube, tiene un par de años ya
https://youtu.be/WSKi8HfcxEk
El alzamiento de las máquinas - ¿Por qué la automatización es diferente esta vez? (en inglés, pueden activar subtítulos)

Puro fearporn que parte de premisas erróneas.

• El trabajo es indeseable, a la etimología me remito.
• Si la gente trabaja es porque no tiene o no conoce otro medio de satisfacer sus necesidades vitales mínimas o no tan mínimas
• Cualquier aumento de la productividad (automatización incluida) es positivo, siempre que redunde en beneficio para todas las partes, es decir, tanto el propietario de los medios como el trabajador se benefician.
• Lo anterior implica que el trabajador puede reducir el número de horas trabajadas sin disminuir su nivel de vida, y perseguir objetivos de realización personal, que normalmente, el trabajo impide
• Lo ideal es no tener que trabajar, ya que nadie perdería ni un minuto en perseguir nada que no le motivara por motivos de autorealización

Las falacias de que "el trabajo dignifica", "es salud", "por lo menos tienes trabajo" ó "trabajas de 'lo tuyo'" están tan interiorizadas que en general la gente parece asumir con naturalidad el autoengaño, y se niega a reconocer que trabaja obligada para satisfacer unas necesidades vitales, algunas naturales, otras no tanto.

El problema es el reparto de lo producido, de la propiedad de los medios de producción, y de la propiedad intelectual.

Hay gente acaparando inmensas fortunas en base a la producción intelectual que otros realizaron en el pasado, comúnmente considerada patrimonio de la humanidad, el conocimiento científico y técnico, y no tengo constancia de que nadie que descubriera algo realizara testamento legando su descubrimiento al enriquecimiento de unos pocos. Dicho legado constituye íntegramente condicion imprescindible para el desarrollo de empresas y fortunas, y contribuyen muy poco por ello, en relación al peso que tienen estas consideraciones científico-técnicas en el éxito de la empresa que proporcionan dichos beneficios.

Ninguno de estos "hombres hechos a sí mismos" ni "empresarios de éxito" son tales, sino que se benefician de los descubrimientos de otros en el pasado, contribuyendo ridículamente por ello.

Planteemos sino el experimento mental de aislar a una comunidad de 10.000 personas en un terreno en un estado de economía de subsistencia previo al descubrimiento de la electricidad, a ver cuantos descubren las matemáticas, física, química, etc, etc, etc para como "hombres hechos a sí mismos" poner un cohete en órbita en el próximo siglo.

El problema son los mercaderes, que se atribuyen prácticamente todo sin haber contribuído nada. Es por eso que fueron expulsados del templo.

En realidad quería hacer una actualización del tema, que considero el mejor de este foro, para que no decaiga, pero creo que me ha salido una exposición del tema (nada original por otra parte), algo trabajada.

Saludos.

[wanderer]

Yo siempre he sido defensor del pleno ocio; el pleno empleo me la chufla, y ni siquiera es en absoluto deseable.

Traigo aquí un clásico sobre el tema:

In_Praise_of_Idleness_and_Other_Essays (Bertrand Russel).

[Cadavre Exquis]

Elon Musk Still Predicts 1 Million Tesla Robotaxis By the End of the Year
Posted by EditorDavid on Monday April 13, 2020 @03:34AM from the grabbing-a-robot-cab dept.

"Elon Musk says Tesla's plan for 1 million robotaxi vehicles on the road by the end of the year is still on — pending regulatory approval," writes the electric car news site Electrek:

At Tesla's 'Autonomy Day' event last year, Musk announced Tesla's plan to deploy 1 million 'Robotaxi' vehicles for a self-driving ride-sharing network by the end of 2020. It's an extension of Tesla's 'Full Self-driving Capability' plan to improve its Autopilot system in all its vehicles produced since 2016 — leading to those vehicles being capable of self-driving. Once that capability is available through an over-the-air software update, which Tesla aims to be by the end of 2020, Tesla anticipates that it will have over 1 million vehicles on the road with the hardware necessary to run the new software...

Today, Tesla's CEO says that he still believes in Tesla's ability to deliver on the functionality of the robotaxi fleet by the end of the year...

However, Tesla and Musk have been wrong about their Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability timeline before.

Electrek's skeptical writer predicts that instead Tesla won't have a robotaxi fleet until "around the end of 2021."

Saturday Musk also cited robotaxis as the reason that Tesla's Model 3 ships with a camera pointed inside offering a clear, wide-angle view of the car's interior -- to keep an eye on passengers -- though he also sees other applications, according to Engadget.

"Musk hinted it might help you record your 'caraoke' sessions, and the company recently applied for a patent on using the camera to recognize occupants and apply settings (such as seat position or climate controls) when they're inside. For now, though, the in-cabin camera is more a symbol of Tesla's lofty, as yet unfulfilled dreams of putting fully self-driving cars on the road."

Saludos.

[muyuu]

https://www.france24.com/en/20200419-in-europe-covid-19-puts-idea-of-universal-income-back-into-welfare-debate
19/04/2020 -

In Europe, Covid-19 puts idea of universal income back into welfare debate

Hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic, Spain is the first European country to lay the foundation for universal income. The health crisis has also reopened the debate about a living wage or unconditional living allowance in France and elsewhere.


Before the pandemic, the question of universal income was at the heart of the agreement between Spain’s ruling socialist party and the radical left-wing Podemos party to form a coalition. Faced with the health and social crisis of the country’s Covid-19 outbreak, the government announced the gradual implementation of a minimum subsistence income: a safety net of a yet-to-be-determined amount for all families with an income of less than €450.

The measure will take effect in May. “Many families don’t have the means to refill their refrigerators right now,” said Pablo Iglesias, Spain’s minister of social rights and Podemos’s leader, to the Spanish press on April 16.

Unemployment figures have reached record levels in Spain since the beginning of the outbreak: according to the ministry of social security, 900,000 people have lost work between mid-March and April 1, which surpasses the number from the 2008 financial crisis. “The minimum living wage will be permanent, as provided for in the coalition agreement,” said José Luis Escrivá, the ministry’s head, on the Spanish channel Cadena SER.

“From the start, universal income has been one of Podemos’s campaign themes. Today, we are somewhat in a minimum income model, which is intended to cover the essential needs of life. They are not the same thing,” explained Joan Cortinas-Munoz, a researcher at the Centre of Sociology at Sciences Po Paris and a specialist in Spanish social politics, to FRANCE 24.

Cortinas-Munoz also points out that Spanish regions, which enjoy administrative autonomy, have established their own minimum allowance programs, with the requirement that recipients are looking for work, since the late 1980s. The Spanish government has announced that its universal income program will complement these regional systems.

The universal income debate

Will the measure suffice? “In some regions of Spain, the amounts of money in these programs are ridiculous. They provide around €500 for a single person, while the poverty line for an individual is about €750,” Cortinas-Munoz said.

“What’s more, this health crisis will be an economic crisis. The worst since World War Two. With soaring unemployment, many people will face a social welfare system that’s been hardened by 30 years of reforms. Many will be excluded from accessing it,” he said.

Numerous voices are calling for a universal income mechanism. Twitter chief executive Jack Dorsey announced a donation of $1 billion to help manage the pandemic and the post-lockdown period by establishing a “universal basic income”. In Germany, the designer Tonia Merz started a petition that gained more than 460,000 signatures and was sent to the Bundestag. In the UK, 170 members of parliament called for unconditional aid for all for the duration of the Covid-19 crisis, but Finance Minister Rishi Sunak dismissed the idea.

In an open letter circulated on Easter Sunday, Pope Francis wrote in favor of a universal basic wage to “honor the essential and noble work” of low-income workers. “Street vendors, scrap merchants, stall keepers, small farmers, construction workers, garment workers, various caregivers” are “totally invisible in the system”, said the head of the Catholic Church.

In France, rethinking the post-crisis period

In France, the idea of universal basic income is not new. But it is newly resonant as the health crisis has demonstrated the vulnerability of workers in precarious jobs. “Those without access to partial unemployment or retirement benefits, like deliverers for digital platforms such as Deliveroo, have no financial guarantees if they stop working to protect their health,” said Nicole Teke, the spokeswoman for the Mouvement Français pour un Revenu de Base (French Movement for Basic Income, or MFRB), an organisation created in 2013.

“There are holes in social security, we want a real security base for everyone,” the activist, who welcomes Spain’s initiative to install a living wage, told FRANCE 24.

Universal income could be at the core of a philosophical debate about a post-Covid-19 model for society “for reasserting the value of essential jobs, such as home healthcare aide, which are the most poorly paid, and also to put an end to constant suspicion towards the unemployed within the administrations that pay social benefits in France,” she said.

Economic recovery could hamper social justice

In June 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron launched a dialogue around a universal activity income to merge welfare, housing allowances and the state’s activity bonus. According to its contours, which are still unclear, beneficiaries will commit to not refusing more than two job offers. “Universal income, as we understand it, will not be implemented by the current government,” said Trek.

“In the crisis scenario before us, I don’t see how a government could embark on a logic of universal income, with the pressure of financial markets, banks and international financial institutions on countries’ budgets,” Cortinas-Munoz said.

In its forecast of April 15, the International Monetary Fund’s expected Spain’s public debt to increase to 113 percent from 95 percent in 2019. In France, where more than nine million employees are on partial unemployment, the debt is expected to jump 17 points to 115 percent of gross domestic product in 2020.

"There are two opposing visions of society,” Trek said. “That which wants to take this opportunity brought by the crisis for rethinking our system on the basis of social justice, and that which wants to save businesses and the economy, tightening the belt.”

https://www.thecanary.co/feature/2020/05/12/brighton-and-hove-council-is-the-first-to-debate-trialling-universal-basic-income/
2020/05/12

Brighton and Hove council is the first to debate trialling Universal Basic Income

[...]



https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/497244-universal-basic-income-and-the-end-of-the-republic
2020/05/12

The U.S. economy is sinking, and some on the far left have a preposterous plan to prevent Americans from drowning in more unpaid bills and debt: Stay home and don’t worry about anything. The government will send you a check for $2,000 every month.

If only it were that easy.

Since the onslaught of shutdowns to flatten the curve and prevent the nation’s health care system from being overwhelmed, more than 30 million Americans have lost their jobs. The unemployment rate has skyrocketed to 14.7 percent. Families throughout the United States are struggling to buy food and pay their bills because the government will not let them return to work.


To date, Congress has allocated more than $2.4 trillion in coronavirus-related economic aid. From the CARES Act to the Paycheck Protection Program, Congress has tried to keep businesses afloat and employees on payrolls. Obviously, as the most recent unemployment report shows, this stopgap strategy is not working.

Perhaps we should pause and reassess the necessity of the draconian shutdown strategy. After all, we have flattened the curve, and at this point it does not seem that health care facilities are in danger of being overrun. Wouldn’t it make a lot of sense to focus on how to safely reopen the economy so Americans can return to work and retain their self-reliance?

Yet, according to prominent Democrats in Congress, instead of smartly reopening the economy, we should double-down on Keynesian economics and just print more money than ever. In other words, Americans ought to stay home and get “paid” by the U.S. government.

According to Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), “The government has told people we need to shelter in place to keep safe. So it’s the government’s obligation to provide for basic expenses while we’re telling people not to work. It’s really that simple.” Khanna is just one of many congressional Democrats who are calling for the federal government to send Americans monthly payments for who knows how long.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) recently tweeted, “Bills come in every single month during the pandemic and so should help from our government.” Harris has endorsed a plan called the Monthly Economic Crisis Support Act, which would send $2,000 per month to Americans who make less than $120,000 per year. Married couples would receive $4,000 per month, as well as $2,000 for each child.


Oh, and the checks would be sent for up to three months after the coronavirus crisis ends. This raises an interesting point: When and how will we know the “crisis” has ended, and the payments will be stopped? This alone should raise one’s eyebrows.

American history is full of examples of government programs that were intended to be temporary yet continue to this day. In fact, several provisional measures and programs enacted during the Great Depression are still in place today.

A cynic might say that some Democrats are using the coronavirus crisis as an opportunity to push their progressive agenda. For years, many on the far left have advocated for monthly government programs in the form of a universal basic income (UBI). Andrew Yang, a contender for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nomination, made the UBI a pivotal part of his campaign and received lots of attention and acclaim for doing so. Remember the “Yang Gang”?

Moreover, the Green New Deal — a wish list for the far left — contains a UBI to provide “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.” Yes, the architects of the Green New Deal want the U.S. government to pay Americans, even if they just don’t want to work.

Keep in mind, all of this fervor over the UBI in far-left circles predated the COVID-19 pandemic by a few years, at least. So, given the historical context, is it such a logical leap to assume that some on the left are using the coronavirus crisis as an opportunity to introduce another “temporary” welfare program that is almost assuredly going to be popular among Americans who receive it?

Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” Could a UBI in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic inadvertently lead to this nightmare scenario?

Véase también: RBU vs INR
https://www.transicionestructural.net/index.php?topic=2012.0;all

[wanderer]

https://www.france24.com/en/20200419-in-europe-covid-19-puts-idea-of-universal-income-back-into-welfare-debate
19/04/2020 -

In Europe, Covid-19 puts idea of universal income back into welfare debate

Hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic, Spain is the first European country to lay the foundation for universal income. The health crisis has also reopened the debate about a living wage or unconditional living allowance in France and elsewhere.


Before the pandemic, the question of universal income was at the heart of the agreement between Spain’s ruling socialist party and the radical left-wing Podemos party to form a coalition. Faced with the health and social crisis of the country’s Covid-19 outbreak, the government announced the gradual implementation of a minimum subsistence income: a safety net of a yet-to-be-determined amount for all families with an income of less than €450.

The measure will take effect in May. “Many families don’t have the means to refill their refrigerators right now,” said Pablo Iglesias, Spain’s minister of social rights and Podemos’s leader, to the Spanish press on April 16.

Unemployment figures have reached record levels in Spain since the beginning of the outbreak: according to the ministry of social security, 900,000 people have lost work between mid-March and April 1, which surpasses the number from the 2008 financial crisis. “The minimum living wage will be permanent, as provided for in the coalition agreement,” said José Luis Escrivá, the ministry’s head, on the Spanish channel Cadena SER.

“From the start, universal income has been one of Podemos’s campaign themes. Today, we are somewhat in a minimum income model, which is intended to cover the essential needs of life. They are not the same thing,” explained Joan Cortinas-Munoz, a researcher at the Centre of Sociology at Sciences Po Paris and a specialist in Spanish social politics, to FRANCE 24.

Cortinas-Munoz also points out that Spanish regions, which enjoy administrative autonomy, have established their own minimum allowance programs, with the requirement that recipients are looking for work, since the late 1980s. The Spanish government has announced that its universal income program will complement these regional systems.

The universal income debate

Will the measure suffice? “In some regions of Spain, the amounts of money in these programs are ridiculous. They provide around €500 for a single person, while the poverty line for an individual is about €750,” Cortinas-Munoz said.

“What’s more, this health crisis will be an economic crisis. The worst since World War Two. With soaring unemployment, many people will face a social welfare system that’s been hardened by 30 years of reforms. Many will be excluded from accessing it,” he said.

Numerous voices are calling for a universal income mechanism. Twitter chief executive Jack Dorsey announced a donation of $1 billion to help manage the pandemic and the post-lockdown period by establishing a “universal basic income”. In Germany, the designer Tonia Merz started a petition that gained more than 460,000 signatures and was sent to the Bundestag. In the UK, 170 members of parliament called for unconditional aid for all for the duration of the Covid-19 crisis, but Finance Minister Rishi Sunak dismissed the idea.

In an open letter circulated on Easter Sunday, Pope Francis wrote in favor of a universal basic wage to “honor the essential and noble work” of low-income workers. “Street vendors, scrap merchants, stall keepers, small farmers, construction workers, garment workers, various caregivers” are “totally invisible in the system”, said the head of the Catholic Church.

In France, rethinking the post-crisis period

In France, the idea of universal basic income is not new. But it is newly resonant as the health crisis has demonstrated the vulnerability of workers in precarious jobs. “Those without access to partial unemployment or retirement benefits, like deliverers for digital platforms such as Deliveroo, have no financial guarantees if they stop working to protect their health,” said Nicole Teke, the spokeswoman for the Mouvement Français pour un Revenu de Base (French Movement for Basic Income, or MFRB), an organisation created in 2013.

“There are holes in social security, we want a real security base for everyone,” the activist, who welcomes Spain’s initiative to install a living wage, told FRANCE 24.

Universal income could be at the core of a philosophical debate about a post-Covid-19 model for society “for reasserting the value of essential jobs, such as home healthcare aide, which are the most poorly paid, and also to put an end to constant suspicion towards the unemployed within the administrations that pay social benefits in France,” she said.

Economic recovery could hamper social justice

In June 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron launched a dialogue around a universal activity income to merge welfare, housing allowances and the state’s activity bonus. According to its contours, which are still unclear, beneficiaries will commit to not refusing more than two job offers. “Universal income, as we understand it, will not be implemented by the current government,” said Trek.

“In the crisis scenario before us, I don’t see how a government could embark on a logic of universal income, with the pressure of financial markets, banks and international financial institutions on countries’ budgets,” Cortinas-Munoz said.

In its forecast of April 15, the International Monetary Fund’s expected Spain’s public debt to increase to 113 percent from 95 percent in 2019. In France, where more than nine million employees are on partial unemployment, the debt is expected to jump 17 points to 115 percent of gross domestic product in 2020.

"There are two opposing visions of society,” Trek said. “That which wants to take this opportunity brought by the crisis for rethinking our system on the basis of social justice, and that which wants to save businesses and the economy, tightening the belt.”

https://www.thecanary.co/feature/2020/05/12/brighton-and-hove-council-is-the-first-to-debate-trialling-universal-basic-income/
2020/05/12

Brighton and Hove council is the first to debate trialling Universal Basic Income

[...]



https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/497244-universal-basic-income-and-the-end-of-the-republic
2020/05/12

The U.S. economy is sinking, and some on the far left have a preposterous plan to prevent Americans from drowning in more unpaid bills and debt: Stay home and don’t worry about anything. The government will send you a check for $2,000 every month.

If only it were that easy.

Since the onslaught of shutdowns to flatten the curve and prevent the nation’s health care system from being overwhelmed, more than 30 million Americans have lost their jobs. The unemployment rate has skyrocketed to 14.7 percent. Families throughout the United States are struggling to buy food and pay their bills because the government will not let them return to work.


To date, Congress has allocated more than $2.4 trillion in coronavirus-related economic aid. From the CARES Act to the Paycheck Protection Program, Congress has tried to keep businesses afloat and employees on payrolls. Obviously, as the most recent unemployment report shows, this stopgap strategy is not working.

Perhaps we should pause and reassess the necessity of the draconian shutdown strategy. After all, we have flattened the curve, and at this point it does not seem that health care facilities are in danger of being overrun. Wouldn’t it make a lot of sense to focus on how to safely reopen the economy so Americans can return to work and retain their self-reliance?

Yet, according to prominent Democrats in Congress, instead of smartly reopening the economy, we should double-down on Keynesian economics and just print more money than ever. In other words, Americans ought to stay home and get “paid” by the U.S. government.

According to Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), “The government has told people we need to shelter in place to keep safe. So it’s the government’s obligation to provide for basic expenses while we’re telling people not to work. It’s really that simple.” Khanna is just one of many congressional Democrats who are calling for the federal government to send Americans monthly payments for who knows how long.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) recently tweeted, “Bills come in every single month during the pandemic and so should help from our government.” Harris has endorsed a plan called the Monthly Economic Crisis Support Act, which would send $2,000 per month to Americans who make less than $120,000 per year. Married couples would receive $4,000 per month, as well as $2,000 for each child.


Oh, and the checks would be sent for up to three months after the coronavirus crisis ends. This raises an interesting point: When and how will we know the “crisis” has ended, and the payments will be stopped? This alone should raise one’s eyebrows.

American history is full of examples of government programs that were intended to be temporary yet continue to this day. In fact, several provisional measures and programs enacted during the Great Depression are still in place today.

A cynic might say that some Democrats are using the coronavirus crisis as an opportunity to push their progressive agenda. For years, many on the far left have advocated for monthly government programs in the form of a universal basic income (UBI). Andrew Yang, a contender for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nomination, made the UBI a pivotal part of his campaign and received lots of attention and acclaim for doing so. Remember the “Yang Gang”?

Moreover, the Green New Deal — a wish list for the far left — contains a UBI to provide “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.” Yes, the architects of the Green New Deal want the U.S. government to pay Americans, even if they just don’t want to work.

Keep in mind, all of this fervor over the UBI in far-left circles predated the COVID-19 pandemic by a few years, at least. So, given the historical context, is it such a logical leap to assume that some on the left are using the coronavirus crisis as an opportunity to introduce another “temporary” welfare program that is almost assuredly going to be popular among Americans who receive it?

Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” Could a UBI in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic inadvertently lead to this nightmare scenario?

Véase también: RBU vs INR
https://www.transicionestructural.net/index.php?topic=2012.0;all

Yo no soy nada partidario de las paguitas, pero puedo aceptarlas como medidas temporales dirigidas a sectores desprotegidos muy concretos. El problema es que los de P's aprovechan el momento presente para introducir ése tipo de discurso no con intención de paliativo temporal, sino usar descaradamente una crisis como palanca para introducir un cambio permanente de acuerdo a sus intenciones de ingeniería social (lo del genaro, ahora lo tienen un tanto aparcado, pero sin duda las ayudas se repartirán "con perspectiva de género").

En fin, creo que casi todo está ya dicho.

[visillófilas pepitófagas]

Siguen con el despiste.

Es universal si es para todos. Si es para algunos, no es universal.

Si es para los que lo pasan mal, es una ayuda - otra más o la que sustituye a todas las demás.

Si es temporal e incentiva salir de una mala situación, es una verdadera ayuda. Si no, es droga no química y compra de votos.

Si además se concede sin pinchar burbujas, especialmente la mayor, la inmobiliaria, es una ayuda al sostenimiento de la burbuja.