未登录,请登录后再发表信息
最新评论 (0)
播放视频

全民基本收入存在的巨大问题

The colossal problem with universal income | #7 of Top 10 2019 | Big Think

《全民基本收入的巨大问题》
For a long time I was a fan of universal basic income.
很长一段时间以来 我热衷于全民基本收入的问题
And the logic I had was that
我这样想的逻辑是
I always hear politicians talking about,
我总是听到政客们讨论
Let’s create jobs for people.
“我们为人们增加工作岗位吧
That’s what we need is jobs, more jobs,’
我们需要的是工作 更多的工作岗位”
as if that’s what’s going to solve the economic problem.
仿佛增加工作岗位就能解决经济问题
So the government is supposed to lend money to a bank,
政府应该拨款给银行
who can then lend money to a corporation,
再由银行贷款给公司
who will then build a factory in order for people to have jobs.
然后公司建造工厂 为人们提供工作
Do we really need more jobs?
我们真的需要更多的工作吗?
In California, they’re tearing down houses as we speak,
在加州 他们正如我们说的那样在拆房子
because the houses are in foreclosure,
因为这些房子已经是止赎房了
and they want to keep market values high.
而政客们想要房子的市值处于高位
The US Department of Agriculture burns food every week
美国农业部门为了稳定食物的高价
in order to keep the prices of that food high,
每周都会烧掉食物
even though there’s people who are starving and people who need homes.
即使仍有人饥肠辘辘 无家可归
We can’t just let people have those homes.
我们无法直接让人们拥有那些房屋
Why? Because they don’t have jobs.
为什么? 因为他们没有工作
So now we’re supposed to create jobs for people
所以我们现在要做的 是为人们提供
to make useless stuff for other people to buy plastic crap
生产无用之物的工作 这些东西总有人会买的
that we’re going to throw away or stick in storage units
哪怕我们打算把这些塑料垃圾扔掉或者丢在杂物间
or end up in landfill just so those people can have jobs
甚至是垃圾填埋场 这样 那些人就有工作了
so that we can justify letting them participate in the abundance.
这样我们就能证明他们也享受到了丰富的物质
And that’s kind of ass backwards.
这有点搞错了
So I thought, well, shoot, rather than creating useless jobs,
于是我想着 不对 与其创造一些无意义的工作
what if we just let people have the stuff that’s in abundance?
要是我们直接让人们拥有那些本来就很充足的东西呢?
Just let people have the houses.
就让他们得到那些房子吧
What’s the problem with this?
这种做法有什么问题呢?
And UBI kind of goes along that lines of, well,
但是UBI坚持认为
if we have more than enough stuff,
如果我们的物资供大于求了
if we don’t need everybody working all the time,
如果我们不需要全民一直工作
then why don’t we just let people have income?
那我们干嘛不直接给人们发钱呢?
Or at least go to a four-day workweek or a three-day workweek or a two-day workweek.
或者至少变成每周工作四天或者三天 甚至两天
If work is the thing that’s scarce,
如果工作是个稀缺的东西
then why don’t we mete that out and say,
我们干嘛不分配工作然后说
‘OK, we’ve got these 10 days that you’re allowed to work this year.
“是这样的 我们今年只能允许你工作十天
So come on, come onto the farm and do that work,
赶紧来农场吧 把你的活干完
and then you’ll have to find something else for you to do the rest of the time.’
这样你就不得不找点别的事做打发你剩下的时间”
But in reality, it’s not like that.
但是现实不是这样的
If we were really that efficient
如果我们真的那么高效
then we wouldn’t be destroying the planet with pollution.
我们就不会用污染来破坏地球
What we’ve done is found ways of
我们真正做的
making stuff and doing things that require very little labor,
其实是在找到方法来用极少的劳动力生产时
but externalize a host of other problems to a whole lot of other places.
将许多其他问题通通外部化了
So we could 3D print or something,
我们可以用3D打印之类的东西
but where do you get the plastic goop for your 3D printer?
但是我们在哪能买到3D打印机的塑料胶圈呢?
What mine in Africa is it coming out of
从非洲开采出来的是什么矿?
and which topsoil is it destroying?
又破坏了哪里的表层土壤呢?
You know, when we’re going to run out of topsoil in 60 years,
你知道吗 当我们的表土只够用60年时
it means that we’re not actually
这意味着我们实际上并没有在农业中使用适当的
using the appropriate labor intensive permaculture solutions in agriculture and all that.
劳动密集型永续养殖解决方案 以及诸如此类的方法
So first off, that whole idea that
因此 首先 我们正在朝着低就业社会迈进
we’re moving towards lower employment is a myth.
的整个想法就是一个神话
We’ve faked lower employment through extremely extractive,
我们通过极度采掘 剥削 污染
exploitative, polluting, and unsustainable business practices.
和不可持续的商业作法伪造了低就业
And second, I was giving a talk at Uber
其次 我曾经在Uber公司做过一次演讲
and I was talking to them about the problems with their business model
我当时和他们谈了他们商业模式的问题
and how they’re putting all these drivers out of work.
以及他们是怎么让司机们丢了工作的
And here they are, these freelancers working for the company, basically training the algorithms
答案是 这些为公司工作的自由职业者
that will be replacing them without any profit participation
基本上是在无偿的为终端公司
in the end-game company.
训练将要替换他们自己的算法
And one of the guys got up
其中有个人站起来
and basically quoted back to me a passage from my own book
直接从我的书《朝谷歌的公车上扔石头》
Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus,he said,
引用了一段原话 他说
well, what about universal basic income?
那么 全民基本收入这个政策呢?
And when I heard it coming out of their mouths,
当我从他们的口中听到这些话时
I realized, ‘Oh.’ So universal basic income isn’t just a way
我意识到 原来全民基本收入不仅仅是
to help people have the money they need to survive
帮助人们获得生存基本所需的钱
and have time to innovate and come up with other solutions.
并且有时间去创新找到其他解决方案的办法
It’s becoming an excuse for companies like Uber
它已经变成了像Uber这样的公司
to not pay a living wage to their workers.
不为其员工支付最低生活工资的借口
So what’s the idea?
那应该怎么办呢?
Oh, we’ll get the government to print more money
哦 我们要让政府印更多的钱来发给工人
to give it to workers for them to spend with us.
让他们和我们一起消费
So what really happens?
所以到底发生了什么?
What is universal basic income?
全民基本收入到底是什么?
It’s just a way of perpetuating our roles as consumers
这只是使我们作为金字塔底层消费者
at the bottom of the pyramid, not as owners.
而不是所有者的角色得以延续的一种方式
If we’re gonna go to anything, I would say,
如果我们想要去解决什么事 我可能要问
what about universal basic assets?
那全民基础资产状况如何呢?
What about actual participation?
实际参与情况又怎么样呢?
What if the workers owned the means of production?
如果工人们拥有了生产资料会怎么样?
So you don’t just give them a handout so that
因此 我们不应该只为了
the money ends up in the same corporate coffers
让钱分配到相同的公司并流入相同的股份
and going into the same shares.
才给他们提供援助
That’s not the point.
这不是重点
What universal basic income does
如果你从全局来看
if you look at the whole model is
无差别基本收入的作用应该是
allows the people who own the lion’s share of our world to own more and more of it.
允许拥有我们世界最大份额的人们拥有的越来越多
We just print more money,
我们就印更多的钱
and more of it goes up to the top.
然后更多的钱流向顶层人物
That’s not the way to get long-term equity.
这不是能获得长期股权的办法
Sure, Social Security, welfare, the dole,
当然 社会保障 福利 救济金
all those things are fine for those in need.
所有这些东西对穷困中的人都很好
But it’s not a great long-term economic strategy.
但这不是一个伟大的长期经济战略
It’s really just a Band-Aid on extractive corporate capitalism.
这实际上只是一个剥削型企业资本主义的创可贴
How do we get to extract more?
我们如何提取到更多的钱?
We’ll just print more cash for us to extract.
我们只需印刷更多的现金提取就好

发表评论

译制信息
视频概述

增加就业真的能解决经济问题吗?为什么有的人饥肠辘辘,政府却倒掉食物?为什么有的人无家可归,政府却在拆毁房屋?我们的社会,真的是高效的社会了吗?

听录译者

收集自网络

翻译译者

ody

审核员

审核员 V

视频来源

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXwZVadCTIk

相关推荐