Lifeboat Foundation

A major conservative publication, The Weekly Standard, has published a positive Cover story about Basic Income, as a way to reign in entitlements and deal with automation. My California libertarian governor campaign gets a brief mention in it. Over 100,000 print copies out this week.

At first blush, universal basic income sounds like something dreamed up on a California commune or in a late-night college bull session. The idea: Just give people money. Ask nothing in return. Impose no requirement to work or to look for work. And don’t just give taxpayer money to people living in poverty, give it to everybody—from gazillionaire to gig-worker—no questions asked.

Yet universal basic income is an idea that is having its moment. Enthusiasm for a government-guaranteed income for all seems to be percolating across the country. Groups backed by Silicon Valley luminaries are forming to devise political strategies. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign flirted with the idea.

“The latest research focused on the impact the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” — digital and traditional technology coming together to deliver efficiencies that will mean more jobs can be automated — will have on employment in the US.”

Read more

” … [W]hile there has been much forecasting on transformations in labour markets, few practical approaches exist to identifying reskilling and job transition opportunities. Towards a Reskilling Revolution: A Future of Jobs for All provides a valuable new tool that will help individual workers, companies, and governments to prioritize their actions and investments.”

Read more

“To clarify, “open borders” means that people are free to move to find work. It does not mean “no borders” or “the abolition of the nation-state”. On the contrary, the reason why migration is so attractive is that some countries are well-run and others, abysmally so.”

Read more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-6V7mOayUY

“Open borders could see global GDP rocket, but free movement around the world could have its downsides. We imagine a borderless world”

Read more

Oxfam said its figures, which some observers have criticized, showed economic rewards were “increasingly concentrated” at the top. The charity cited tax evasion, the erosion of worker’s rights, cost-cutting and businesses’ influence on policy decisions as reasons for the widening inequality gap.

Just 42 people own the same amount of wealth as the poorest 50 percent worldwide, a new study by global charity Oxfam claimed.

In the coming decades, the mining of precious minerals in space is likely to have a major impact on the global economy. And existing laws are nowhere near ready for the shift.

As compared to India, other BRICS nations — Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa — had spent more of their GDP on research. Most of the developed countries, in fact, spent more than 2 per cent of their GDP on R&D.

India’s gross research spending has consistently been increasing over the years but the country’s total expenditure on R&D continues to be less than 1 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) when other emerging economies, including China and Brazil, invest more money on this head.

Representative image.

Continue reading “At less than 1% of GDP, India’s spend on R&D continues to be less than other emerging economies” »

If you are reading this on January 16, 2018, then you are aware that Bitcoin (and the exchange rate of most other coins) fell by 20% today. Whenever I encounter a panic sell-off, the first thing that I do is try to ascertain if the fear that sparked the drop is rational.

But what is rational fear? How can you tell if this is the beginning of the end, or simply a transient dip? In my book, rational fears are fundamental facts like these:

• A new technical flaw is discovered in the math or mining
• A very major hack or theft has undermined confidence
• The potential for applications that are fast, fluid and ubiquitous
  has dropped, based on new information*

Conspicuously missing from this list is “government bans” or any regulation that is unenforceable, because it fails to account for the design of what it attempts to regulate. Taxes, accounting guidelines, reporting regulations are all fine! These can be enforced. But banning something that cannot be banned is not a valid reason for instilling fear in those who have a stake in a new product, process, or technology.

Continue reading “Cryptocurency: Thoughts on a ‘Korea Krash’” »