scott santens

scott santens.png

[image linked to credit]

[new orleans, la]

intro’d to Scott via him tweeting on bi.. because of resonance with money ness/less ness.. radical econ.. bi as jumpstart/placebo for leaping to a nother way..ie: hosting life bits et al

_________

@UBIDP_org

Activist Scott Santens @2noame receives a crowdfunded #basicincome and wants it for all theadvocate.com/news/neworlean… pic.twitter.com/zdbKAkaw23

Scott Santens has committed his life to a single idea: that the government should write every adult citizen a check for $1,000 every month, no strings attached

nice. but perhaps only partial.. and only temp… why money..? when we have tech that can facilitate (rather than measure) connections/transactions

In December, Santens, a tall, lanky 38-year-old transplant from Seattle who works mainly from a white sofa in his living room in Gentilly, fired off a press release: “Writer and basic income advocate Scott Santens has become the first person to successfully crowdfund a perpetual monthly ‘basic income.’ ”

[..]

On a quiet block of Allen Street near Dillard University is a preview of what life might be like in a world where no one has to hold down a job in order to pay the bills.

so ..imagine no bills.. no work for pay.. aka: no measurement of transactions..

In any case, basic income advocates like Santens don’t actually expect that most people will immediately give up gainful employment once the government starts sending them money. *Researchers have experimented with it in various places and typically do not see a big drop in work hours.

*researchers have experimented w it in various places… but not yet in a full on (ie: 100% free\dom) space.. no? so we really don’t know what we’re capable of.. or where our souls would lead us

The important thing for Santens is that under a basic income, no one would starve to death if they lose their job. People can use the free time it gives them to start their own business or go to school or advocate for an idea like the basic income. And no one has to do a job they hate. Let the robots do those jobs, the argument goes.

“It gives you the ability to say no,” Santens said.

gray play law

[..]

A basic income discussion thread that Santens moderates on the website Reddit.com has attracted more than 33,000 followers.

[..]

He referred to the “mental tax of poverty” that might be eliminated by a basic income for all — citing the time people spend worrying about where their next check is going to come from.

_________

from redacted (2015)  – Interview on Basic Income 

want people to start asking.. *what is the point of tech.. and who is it supposed to work for.. it seems it would be to reduce requirements of human labor…  tech has grown to point where we don’t have to work as much.. but benefits are accruing to top layer.. instead.. rather than free us.. w/tech..we’re putting in more hours

*what is point of tech – for us.. no… all of us.. all the earth.. ie: hosting life bits.. as the day:

io dance/hosting life bits (blockchain/stack ness: replace server farms – chip energy efficient –dna\ness)
ps in the open (idiosyncratic jargon)
decision making/B redefined via self-talk as data
___________
rna ness – entropy ness
 
on leap frogging – for (blank)’s sake
gupta roadblock law
________________
3 ship  [a kids’ bookan app/chipan experiment]
short  [deep problem,simple mechanism,opensystem]
short bp

________________

calm tech

3 min – on being at mercy of job creators… we don’t have a choice.. there’s no option to say no.. and that’s really the heart of the power of the idea of bi.. if everyone receives 1000/month then you actually have some bargaining power… like.. you don’t have to take a job..  4 min – this ability to say no is going to be a very powerful transformation..

gray play law

5 min – on welfare programs.. when get a job.. lose benefits.. only giving money to very bottom… for bi.. get a job.. don’t lose bi…changes the conditions…

8 min – on all the experiments we’ve already done.. showing people don’t reduce their work..

10 min – huge productivity cost ..for people who hate their work.. et al

graeber job\less law

people would like to pursue work they want to pursue.. and *that’s what bi allows.. people to pursue work they want to do

*well – kind of.. perhaps not w/o mech (Jane Costello) in place.. or we’d be there already.. no? (ie: app chip as mech simple enough)

11 min – on crime going down 40%

12 min – on bi being only a half way step… if fire exit across room..  you have to walk half way there.. so if you believe we have to get rid of monetary system.. way to do that is bi… to start recognizing work that isn’t paid… once there.. then people suddenly empowered to do work they think is important…

so perhaps a faster way – radical econ ness

13 min – empowered to do this and have voice heard.. much more than we have now

indeed – but we have the means to leap.. and perhaps sync won’t ever happen till we leap..

14 min – seems we’ve strayed form systemic issues… ie: why are these fires happening.. how can we avoid them happening in first place.. those are structural questions..

indeed.. deep/simple/open enough – systemic ness

15 min – so many things this can do..ie: reduce crime/poverty….

indeed.. but again.. since we have the means.. let’s’ use this yes.. but embedded in structure that exponentiates to… all of us.. today.

16  min – on experiment comparing conditional and unconditional cash

18 min – bi as free speech … econ rights.. ie: free speech.. saying you can say whatever you want.. but can you.. ie: can you say no to your boss..? probably not if your income isn’t guaranteed.. w/o econ rights.. it affects all others..

20 min – on how to afford this.. i don’t have cash myself to pay for it.. but certainly country does.. and not as much as we’re thinking…

21 min – on all the ways to come up with money… lot of smart ways to raise revenue

agree.. we can certainly get the money.. but all the ways you listed.. adds B to our day.. why do that.. when we don’t need to..

23 min – on people not understanding/seeing the inequities we have now.. if they could just see that.. i think they’d be for this..

_______

find/follow Scott:

link twitter

Writer and universal advocate; blogger; Moderator of on; living with a crowdfunded monthly basic income

http://www.scottsantens.com/

Writer and advocate of basic income for all; Citizen of Earth and New Orleans; Bachelor of Science in Psychology; Moderator of the /r/BasicIncome community on Reddit; Founder of the BIG Patreon Creator Pledge.

______

deep learning teach us all a lesson

[https://medium.com/basic-income/deep-learning-is-going-to-teach-us-all-the-lesson-of-our-lives-jobs-are-for-machines-7c6442e37a49#.tgec4m11t]

These exponential advances, most notably in forms of artificial intelligence limited to specific tasks, we are entirely unprepared for as long as we continue to insist upon employment as our primary source of income.

rather… as long as we insist on income

because for the first time, we are successfully teaching machines to learn.

? to learn..? or to iterate faster

If machines are performing an increasing percentage of our jobs for us, and not getting paid to do them, where does that money go instead? And what does it no longer buy? Is it even possible that many of the jobs we’re creating don’t need to exist at all, and only do because of the incomes they provide? These are questions we need to start asking, and fast.

? where does that money go..? money is made up..

jobs we don’t need.. of course.. but also money we don’t need

The future is a place of accelerating changes. It seems unwise to continue looking at the future as if it were the past, where just because new jobs have historically appeared, they always will

replace word jobs with money..

the smartest way to distribute the wealth is by implementing a universal basic income.”

the smartest way to distribute wealth is to distribute needs.. facil curiosity.. using/assuming money is just creating more bs jobs and less us

So let’s ask ourselves, what’s the purpose of the technologies we’re creating?.. Is it to allow us to work more hours for even less pay? Or is it to enable us to choose how we work, and to decline any pay/hours we deem insufficient because we’re already earning the incomes that machines aren’t?

enable us to choose what we do.. because we realize money is irrelevant/made-up..

What’s the big lesson to learn, in a century when machines can learn?

I offer it’s that jobs are for machines, and life is for people.

totally agree.. and money is irrelevant to life/people

a nother way

______

unconditional basic income et al ness

bien – basic income earth network

______

Advertisements