You should consider this

The two most powerful words you can use on @grok : Teach Me Don't just train AI, learn from it!

@BethesdaSupport @Fallout @BethesdaStudios You're leaving me no choice but to do actual work at work.

.@Fallout 76 is now under maintenance on all platforms to apply an update. For server status updates, keep an eye on this account, our Bethesda.net Status Portal, or our official @BethesdaStudios Discord server.

Aldi is one of those stores where you bring your own sack. abc17news.com/news/crime/202…

@StefanMolyneux Same

I still miss Scott Adams

@bradenk @Timcast Real estate is one thing AI can't manufacture. Ownership will become a status symbol.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast We need declining birthrate to reduce chance of societal collapse as robots/AI replace human labor. I agree that specialization & entrepreneurship increase, but commercial real estate is cratering already and residential collapse is picking up steam (boomer deaths & layoffs)

You can't fund UBI through taxing AI The math does not add up You need greater input than output for the system to function and taxing AI to give UBI generates massive output with insufficient input. The cost of the system will be greater than the revenue dispersed creating a negative feedback loop and economic regression The argument then becomes that UBI will only be supplemental but you still run into the inflation problem again. When given a choice between working 40 hours a week and receiving 10K UBI and 15K wages many people would choose unlimited free time and 10k In order to then hire someone for jobs we cannot automate you have to then increase pay for those jobs thus the cost of the good increases and the 10k supplemental now is largely useless for most goods and services I break the question down like this How many people do you know play guitar? Most say quite a few How many would choose to be a musician professionally if they had the choice? Most say in fact quite a few How many have the talent to actually make it? none if any And that still assumes most people would choose to pursue a passion with some economic benefit The reality is that many people would choose UBI and 40 hours of some creative work that ultimately provides no functional value to society and that generates no revenue. We effectively use tech to subsidize net negative output from people That system is bound to implode The most important thing to understand is that there are core necessities such as housing and healthcare that cannot be meaningfully automated. UBI is a pipe dream that can't even exist in a society with replicators from Star Trek. Land is still owned or leased and money is the means of distribution. If you want to argue for government control of property then youre just arguing for techno-communism

@bradenk @Timcast The political power shifts need serious consideration. So does the declining birth rate. Short term, I see AI accelerating specialization and the gig economy. Long term, I see real estate becoming immensely valuable.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast It's a hypothesis. Could be developed more for sure. I would be curious which factors are missing so I could address (or at least think about) them. UBI won't work at scale. Our best bet is to right size our labor force by eliminating variable labor supply corporations $arbitrage

@bradenk @Timcast Thank you, Branden. It's an interesting article. There are some factors at play you don't address, but the general gist is good.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast Why an AI Soft Landing Might Look Like Victorian England -- bradenkelley.com/2026/04/why-an… -- The Mirage of the Post-Scarcity Utopia -- #ai

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Do away with? You mean kiII ?!? Or do you mean it will do away with jobs the same way the PC did?

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok If automation and AI were to do away with ~30% of the current human labor force. What would you suggest. Out of curiousity.

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Yes, you can. Which is why I stared with a basic principle: "The belief that government is responsible for providing you with everything you need." You either beleive that, or you don't. But you never said either way.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok At the end of the day. You can twist whatever it is you want and call it communism and hate it. But it still won't be communism...

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Oh, sorry. I forgot you don't read things. Get back to me if you do read it.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok So it isn't communism then. Same way labor unions are not communist.

Is the exchange rate two bevers for one deer because takes more labor to get a deer than a beaver? How do they tax my beaver? (a little Adam Smith humor). Back to it: Under capitalism, the market controls the value of $. UBI give the government more control of the market. It does so by giving it direct control of the subjective marginal utility of $. UBI allows the government to alter incentives, resource flows, and political dynamics in ways that favor state influence. No, it's not full-blown central planning, but you don't need central planning to achieve communist ideals. Google "the capitalist road to communism" if you want the complete outline.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok He was not no. And making the the determinant from the buyer sides labor is leading directly into the subjective theory of value. The labor done by the buyer determines price. Just like what an individual is willing to do in order to acquire a good for exchange... 🤭

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Wait, you can't answer! Do you think that Smith was a communist?

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok Did adam smith believe in the labor theory of value for ALL goods and services 🤔

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok You're confusing Marxism with communism. Marxism is just one flavor of communism. Adam Smith believed in the labor theory of money too. Do you think he was a communist?

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok The theory behind communism is the labor theory of value. That is the fundamental underpinning of communism.

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Because?

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok I have yes. Direct payments from the government isn't communist.

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok You're describing the mechanisms used to establish communism, not the theory behind it.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok >At its core, Communism is the belief that Gov. is responsible for allocating resources to the individual Communism is hijacking the subjective theory of value in favor for the labor theory of value. Then implementing central planners to determine the value of goods/services...

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok You still haven't read Freidman I see.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok If you are to believe that direct cash payments from the government is a form of communism. Then you fundamentally believe that friedman was a communist...

You keep saying that, yet you haven't demonstrated basic knowledge of...well...anything. Certainly not of Friedman. Since you're begging me for lessons, here they are. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - Karl Marx At its core, Communism is the belief that Gov. is responsible for allocating resources to the individual. The USSR, Mao's China, and the Eastern Bloc states all tried to do this and failed. Under capitalism, the government’s role is limited to protecting rights and enabling voluntary cooperation, leaving welfare primarily to personal responsibility, family, and community. Freidman believed in capitalism but was pragmatic enough to know that the gov. couldn't end welfare all at once. His NIT proposal was an attempt to wean the gov. off of welfare, not create more of it.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok I'm waiting for you to tell me what communism actually is. Because it seems you don't even understand the distinctions between the two 🤣🤣

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok If you had actually ready any of his writings, you would know that.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok But you already said you believed that cash payments from the gov was communist. That would mean Friedmans NIT in practice would be communist...

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok No. Freidman argued that charity was the proper way to alleviate poverty, not government support. He saw NIT as the most economically efficient form of welfare. Yes. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok Again. Did Friedman argue that people with no income should receive direct cash payments from the government? And if he did. Is receiving direct cash payments from the government communist?

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast @grok Sorry if my replies get delayed. Hope you're having fun.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast @grok 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@Jim849529967812 @Timcast You brought Freidman into this. If you don't know what he said, that's on you.

@NopeNotByMe @Timcast Could it be that you don't actually understand the principles of your own belief?