> I can get $X for free, so I need "more than $X" to keep picking potatoes. Now potatoes cost "more than $X" because of labor cost. You can't buy potatoes with your $X UBI.
Why do you need more than $X to do the same job? Anything you get paid with be on top of UBI. People picking potatoes today are hardly living the life of luxury, pay their basic needs and they'll most likely just keep doing their same job and spending that extra money on stuff one level above survival.
This is the frustrating circular logic here...someone HAS to pick the potatoes! They don’t just show up magically, and you can’t just extrapolate and say that robots will handle all production of basic resources for an entire massive populace.
Normally, socialist economies get around this problem by some combination of slavery, extremely high taxation, forced labor (I.e. not enough farmers - so I’m going to force you to farm regardless of your desired occupation) and/or starvation. Clearly none of those are ideal.
What happens to you today if you don't farm? Starvation and/or homelessness.
I'm not suggesting socialism (as a first step). Like I said, people who are currently doing these jobs, will most likely continue to do them. It's just an upgraded base level of living for all and no one has to starve.
So let's go back.
Today:
We both pick potatoes. A day's worth of potatoes costs $X UBI pays $X I decide, fuck work - I'll eat free potatoes.
Tomorrow: You say - I can get $X for free, so I need "more than $X" to keep picking potatoes. Now potatoes cost "more than $X" because of labor cost. You can't buy potatoes with your $X UBI.
>> "potatoes .. is some real low hanging fruit."
At least that much we can agree on.