How can one not understand that UBI is captured by inflation.

Its just a modern religion really because anyone can understand this it is so basic and obvious.

You don't have to point out some bullshit captured study that says otherwise.

Inflation is a lack of goods for a given demand though. Ie if we can flood the world with cheap goods then inflation won't happen. That would make practical UBI possible. To some extent it has already happened.

My intuition, based on what I know of economics, is that a UBI policy would have results something like the following:

* Inflation, things get more expensive. People attempt to consume more, especially people with low income. * People can't consume more than is produced, so prices go up. * People who are above the break-even line (when you factor in the taxes) consume a bit less, or stay the same and just save less or reduce investments. * Producers, seeing higher prices, are incentivized to produce more. Increases in production tend to be concentrated toward the things that people who were previously very income-limited want to buy. I'd expect a good bit of that to be basic essentials, but of course it would include lots of different things. * The system reaches a new equilibrium, with the allocation of produced goods being a bit more aimed toward the things regular people want, and a bit less toward luxury goods for the wealthy. * Some people quit work to take care of their kids full-time. The change in wages of those who stay working depends heavily on how competitive their skills are -- some earn less, but with the UBI still win out. Some may actually get paid more even without counting the UBI, if a lot of workers in their industry have quit due to the UBI, and there's increased demand for the products. * Prices have risen, but not enough to cancel out one's additional UBI income entirely. It's very hard to say how much would be eaten up by inflation, but I'd expect it's not 10% or 90%, probably somewhere in between. Getting an accurate figure for that would take a lot of research and modeling.

Basically, I think it's complicated, with all the second and third-order effects, but I can't imagine a situation where so much of the UBI is captured by inflation that it makes it pointless. I do think that as a society, we should be morally responsible for people who can't earn a living for whatever reason, and I think UBI is a better system than a patchwork of various services with onerous requirements that people have to put a lot of effort into navigating, and where finding gainful employment will cause you to lose benefits.

She is obviously a true believer or very clever self promoter that knows her target market.

The real question is why is such stupid shit like this being posted here?

Anthropic is actually a great example of the free market working well.

To compare OpenAI to Standard Oil just shows the person has no idea of the business practices of Standard Oil.

Sounds like the current zeitgeist.

Seems like it should be useful beyond demos but we aren't sure what those use cases would be. Just need to wait for AGI and then..

I have actually spent about 20 minutes now and I can't think anything worth asking the model in this context.

I think with LLMs the tighter the constraints you give it and the bumpers the better it is. Something you could do with it is like a JackBox game that generates the content. However I think it is very dangerous to rely too heavily on it without writing something to kind of gate or filter the inputs.

Almost as if it needs data sanitization.

I can't think of any effective marketing in my entire life that didn't involve repetition.

I think when people say they need to learn marketing they really mean they want to learn to skimp on spending on marketing.

Nothing anyone could come up with for 1 or 2 passes would really beat a white background with black text that just says https://nuenki.app that the target market sees 10 random times for 10 seconds.

I am hopeless at marketing because I think it is just that stupid at this scale of market size and being good at it goes against all my sensibilities.

I would look up how medical students use Anki.

The efficient part would be learning to make cards and decks efficiently.

I can't imagine going back to school and not using Anki.

I think many people have anxiety from a type of cognitive dissonance in this area.

They don't want to make friends, they want someone else to want to be their friend so they know they are liked in the real world. That is what is missing, not the actual experience of friendship. Even if someone asked them to be their friend, many would say no because it would take time away from what is really important to them. Netflix, Reddit, Doordash, Amazon, Hinge, and Pornhub.

How do I know this? Because it exactly describes myself.

Grand Transitions: How the Modern World Was Made by Vaclav Smil

Just a wonderful book.

Not saying I agree with the parent comment but the reason would be because the concept of the efficient market is overly simplistic nonsense?

It is really a great example of how much human knowledge is really just the repeating of a standardized, agreed upon orthodoxy that has little to do with reality. In the 21st century the "expert" in various forms reinforces the orthodoxy far beyond the 20th century.

Economics can't even catch up to the 1980s and dynamic systems.

Even then though, there is a giant global debit maturity wall from covid that needs refinancing at much higher interest rates that starts coming due in 2026 and 2027.

That is much sooner than fiscal dominance in the US. I suspect we can go to 100 trillion in debt at least without fiscal dominance. I suspect everyone will understand what fiscal dominance is in the 2030s though.

This liquidity problem from debt refinancing is much nearer.

To nitpick a bit. I see the fiscal dominance not as "even then" but as a "because of" the unsustainable debt levels.

With the US budget deficit over 35% there are fewer and fewer external parties willing to lend to the US at low rates. The government could reduce the spending (yeah), collect more taxes (raising taxes 50% across the board -- sure) or use fiscal dominance to lower the rates. Fiscal dominance could be done in a variety of ways, either directly (e.g., printing money and using it to buy own bonds) or indirectly (e.g., by printing money and requiring pension funds to hold some treasuries), but whatever way it is done, the increase in M2 that goes with it will devalue assets for an average person. This is not the future; this is already happening via various quantitative easing programs. That was a US-centric view; Western Europe is in a broadly similar state.

The beauty of fiscal dominance for politicians and MMT-subscribing economists is that it removes the liquidity problem from debt refinancing. The problem (and the quiet part that some forget about and say out loud) is that it requires capital controls.

Capital flow controls was something the US had naturally in the 1940s, when a major US fiscal dominance effort was last run. But this is not the state today. In the modern world where one can buy gold, bitcoin or any of 100+ currencies with a few keystrokes capital controls will be harder to enforce.

Next decade will likely be very interesting, at least from the financials viewpoint... My 2c.

Or read Sapolsky on how this line of though is simply stupid and ignorant.