[ExI] most common jobs
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Wed Feb 11 05:25:11 UTC 2015
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:40 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> And the rich may feel
> that paying a small tax
> If entertainment, drugs and social activities are available with
> sufficient basic income
> And the poor cities can ... provide minimal
### Interpreting the words "small", "sufficient" and "minimal" is they key
point of prognostic exercises here:
Let's say, thanks to automation there may be another 2 order of magnitude
increase in per capita income (see
but occurring over the next 50 rather than 500 years. Let's say that the
top 1% of earners would continue to take about 20% of total income,
unchanged from current situation. In that case, their total income would be
equal to 2,000% of current total GDP (i.e. 20 times more than what all
Americans earn today). Let's say that the effective Federal tax rate
remained at 20%, roughly what it is now (there is some hokus-pokus here but
not important for my point). Twenty percent out of 20 times current GDP is
4 times current US GDP, or make it about 70 trillion dollars. Assuming a
lot of immigration, there will be 700 million Americans in 2070. So, the
small, 20% tax on only a tiny sliver of the population could provide an
income subsidy of 100,000 dollars per year (after tax), expressed as real
income in 2015 dollars.
There may be many persons who would protest that 100,000 dollars a year is
a pittance, and an insult, too, way below minimal. I could imagine that in
the next 50 years loud voices would demand a cool million dollars per year
per person as the absolute minimum they would accept from the despicable
capitalist pigs who make all this possible.
It will be a different world, and yet I am sure that in many ways it could
be eerily similar to today's.
> Might turn out OK.
Yep. Might turn out OK.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat