[acke]

Transhumanism is more modern and more beneficial movement than UBI, some of their goals are:"life extension (even immortality), massive economic growth, and super-abundance of material prosperity for eveyonehttp://transhumanist-party.org and https://hpluspedia.org/wiki/Main_Page are their web pages. Transhumanists are the most strongest advocated of technological developmen I am aware of. They expect zero-cost marginal. I feel that UBI can be only a transitory movement before people are ready to accept the already achieved opportunities provided by technology.

[acke]

I think that the false public image is the true reason for the degradation of the image of socialism and communism. I liked this article http://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/newproposals/article/view/2017/182540 from the "New Propoosals" which clearly explains that the socialism or communism is the natural course of history and developmen of technology and socialism or communism can not be naturally introduced by force of by the common acceptance if there is no sufficient level of technological development for the socio-economic phase transition to occur.Marx wrote (bold by me):"in a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly — only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"Marx also warned against crude communism which is introduced by convention of by force and is destined to the failure:"The first positive annulment of private property – crude communism – is thus merely a manifestation of the vileness of private property, which wants to set itself up as the positive community system…The category of the worker is not done away with, but extended to all men…Both sides of the relationship are raised to an imagined universality – labour as the category in which every person is placed, and capital as the acknowledged universality and power of the community.."I have see so many web pages of socialist and communist movements who advocate more or less the redistribution of the current wealth. Well – some years ago the total wealth of High Net Worth Individuals (those with investable assets of 30.000.000 or more) was mere 50 trillion$. If we distribute this walth to the 5 billions of the most impoverished men and women then we get one-time injection of 10.000$ per capita. This is small amount for one time injection and it does not solve the problem of poverty. 10.000 is secondary education or higher education or housing or cost of raising children – only one thing and not all of then. Besides, we should take into account that great part of the wealth is in the form of intangible assets (e.g. goodwill of the companies) and this part is not suitable for eradication of poverty.So – the redistribution does not solve the problem of poverty, the needs of investments for development.So – there are 2 honest and rational answers possible. 1) Marxian answer is to sit and wait till the capitalisms will achieve its ultimate form and then the socio-economic phase transfer occur naturally; 2) to boost the current development of technology to hasten the arrival of socio-economical phase transfer. I think that the Nordic style welfare states are the most efficient form of socialised capitalism that increase the rate of technological advancement.So – socialists and communists must support the development of technology, the increase of production and total wealth and this will be seen as the sound way forward and then people will take more favourable attitude to the socialism and communism.E.g. – compare the websites:https://academic.oup.com/cjeand https://www.marxists.org/and select – what type of socialist you would want to be – the intellectual or the other type? Which type of socialist is more attractive to the general society?

[Author]

Posts