For decades, globalist ideologues have been flooding advanced countries with mass migration, under the guise of preventing low-fertility nations from shrinking. At the same time, we are being made aware by technology experts and economic analysts’ forecasts, that 92 million jobs could be replaced globally by 2030 due to AI.
Read more These women should neither be seen nor heard
In that context, it is becoming apparent that a new push for a Universal Basic Income will make an appearance—to avoid a pervasive economic meltdown, the governments will have to pay redundant workers a regular allowance of course!
Hear me out on this simple equation:
AI Takeover + Immigration Takeover = Cognitive Dissonance
Before we tackle the budgetary constraints of mass migration under UBI, let’s talk about the allowance itself. Universal Basic Income would be provided by governments to displaced workers in order to maintain consumer demand and shield countries from economic earthquakes.
The Left clearly prefers the fish, not the rod…Annie Lowrey, politics and economics policy reporter for the Atlantic magazine, (previously for New York Times) was enthusiastic enough about UBI to write a book on the subject: Give People Money: How a Universal Basic Income Would End Poverty, Revolutionize Work, and Remake the World.
It sounds peachy indeed, but as rightly observed by Margaret Thatcher, “The problem with the Socialists is that they eventually run out of other people’s money.” And by the way, Lowrey’s book was shortlisted for the Financial Times and McKinsey Business Book of the year award in 2018. Same ol’ McKinsey that was paid millions of dollars to advise governments, including the U.S VA and HHS, on how to tackle the Covid-19 pandemic. Just saying.
In her book Lowrey alleges, “A UBI would give people the economic bandwidth to do what they wanted with their lives… Let the robots do the dirty work.”
Read more No candy for you
Interestingly, the left’s main argument about the “necessity” of flooding advanced countries with millions of low-skilled, third world migrants is that they are filling crucial labor gaps by working jobs that the locals refuse to take. So, if the robots do the “dirty work,” what will these migrants do?
Let’s have a sneak peek at the mathematical and fiscal reality of mass migration under UBI. To understand the strain on the state, we can model the country’s fiscal balance mathematically; don’t take my word for it, as you can run your own simulation. At least AI will be useful for something other than taking our jobs. Just enter real or hypothetical numbers: population, UBI recipients (based on accessible previsions), then add migrants. You will be warned that if these immigrants are displaced by AI or lack immediate high-paying employment, they will also require the UBI allowance to survive. The mathematical reality demonstrates that a country cannot maintain a constant (even if moderate money-wise) UBI payout to an expanding recipient pool without experiencing immediate fiscal insolvency and hyperinflation leading to economic collapse.
Under the assumption of high productivity, a smaller population could theoretically sustain a higher per-capita UBI and standard of living as opposed to a larger population inundated by unskilled third-worlders.
We have a choice: Either a smaller, highly productive society with earned prosperity and wealth, where people have a high standard of living and preserve their cultural norms and beliefs, or a society that goes belly up trying to sustain a bloated welfare state with a meager UBI, exorbitant taxes, and social tensions. The time to decide is now. Donald Trump clearly wants the first option for the U.S and the world. Elon Musk seems to have an optimistic vision too, though he differs slightly and considers a UBI a viable option, using the term, “Universal High Income.” If the wrong choices are made, instead of high income, there’ll only be the “jump, don’t ask how high” scenario.
Read more The California regulation industry
Image: Free image, Pixabay license.