I agree, but the issue is this problem is harder than those that industry leaders are putting billions of dollars of R&D money into. What is $50k really going to accomplish? There are Kaggle competitions that pay out more than that for far more trivial problems (like a marginal increase in CTR prediction).

1) A vibrant middle class is an aberration of history. I don't think we can look to history and find meaningful examples of what exponentially increasing technology will do to our current social structures.

2) Our society determines what basic income is. Just like we determine our laws.

3) Living in a society that respects property rights has its costs. Almost the only difference between the relatively peaceful western world and places like the unrest in the middle east is that the vast majority of our population has a lot of opportunities. You take those away and we will have the same unrest here.

I tend to agree with Thomas Paine, who believed that all citizens have a natural inheritance created by the introduction of the system of landed property. So in return for society recognizing property rights those property holders owe society some of its proceeds. He explicitly stated this should not be considered charity.

4) He never said he thought there would only be positive results. He did say he thinks it would be a good idea, but plenty of good ideas still have consequences. And he was openly asking for other opinions while merely offering his own; there is no need to jump down his throat.

5) No one is saying people would be paid not to work. All people would just be told "you don't have to work to meet your basic needs." Once that burden is removed, people would still be free to work to better their lives further. Very few people would just sit around all day doing nothing, and those that do really would be the ones we want removed from the workforce anyway.

I am not necessarily worried about unemployment; I am worried about the increasing gap between the elite and everyone else. Early automation created the need for the middle class, as the wealthy needed trained people to run the machines. But in the past 40 years automation has become far more capable and sophisticated. It requires less people to run modern machines, but they need to be far more skilled than the last generation. This has lead to the shrinking middle class, the rising 1%, and also the rising upper middle class.

The trend of the middle class falling into the lower class, and a small minority of the middle class rising into the upper middle class is what automation is creating.

I envision a future (perhaps 20 years out) where there is a huge gap between a servant class and the elite. The elite will still be split between what is now considered the upper middle class and the 1%, but they will all have a much different lifestyle than the servant class. Today's lower class jobs will be replaced with a more personalized service industry, where your average knowledge worker can easily hire a maid for instance. I am barely in the top 5% of household incomes and even I can already have my house cleaned and yard cared for every other week for less than 3% of our monthly net income. In 20 years that will probably turn into paying someone to do my dishes and laundry for me.

A basic income will allow these individuals who cannot command a living wage to still live a good life. I would love for us to move to a system where minimum wage is abolished but everyone receives around $10k per year and all other income is supplementary. Just the reduction in crime alone may even make this less costly to the upper class than paying for our current prison / police infrastructure. And some of the extra taxes you are paying will come back to you in the form of maids who only cost $4/hr.

Even though the government was not a plaintiff or defendant, it is still our laws that are being used to determine if the lawsuit wins. In this particular case it was anti-trust laws which were being examined.

Boys are certainly negatively impacted by macho ideals such as the importance of "being a man." Any claim that girls are negatively affected by big breasted meek women in video games must also concede that boys are negatively affected by buff macho men who can solve all problems by shooting or beating up their opponents. I think both claims are a bit over the top, but making one claim and not the other is quite hypocritical.

I'll help you since your workplace must be blocking Google. From what I was able to briefly find, the meta-analysis of current research shows three things:

1) Blended use of technology and traditional learning probably produces the best results.
2) We are still figuring out how to best use technology in the classroom, but we are improving.
3) There has not been nearly enough large scale research to "prove" any assertions about the effectiveness of individual techniques in bringing technology to the classroom.

Does the Use of Technology Improve Learning?
The Answer Lies in Design
Effective Use of Technology as a Learning Tool
Learning with Technology. Evidence that technology can, and does, support learning.
Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning. A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies
Using Technology in Education: Does It Improve Anything?

And depending on your definition of "sponsored by someone trying to sell stuff", you are probably unlikely to find many studies at all like that (a fact brought up by a couple of the above studies). Since most school districts cannot afford to spend money on unproven technologies, a large percentage of these studies have their devices donated or heavily subsidized by the device manufacturer. Here are some iPad specific ones, but even though some of them may have had iPads donated they still back up their research with actual test scores.

Five Studies to Prove the iPad’s Educational Worth
iPad improves Kindergartners literacy scores
Study Finds Benefits in Use of iPad as an Educational Tool
iPads Improve Classroom Learning, Study Finds
iPad a Solid Education Tool, Study Reports

As someone who grew up on a farm in rural Illinois, I only knew one farmer (out of dozens) that knew how to fix most of his mechanical issues. Everyone knew how to fix simple things, just like developers can usually fix simple issues with their tools. But any issue which couldn't be fixed by your average person with some handyman and automotive skills needed to be sent to a mechanic. I mean do you really think farmers just have a fully stocked auto shop with replacement parts in their tool shed?

Although you are correct that there is often no time for a mechanic. But the answer usually was to get help from neighbors by borrowing their equipment. And the turnaround from the mechanics at planting / harvest time was usually only a day or two.

Automation of farming removed the knowledge of how to farm without the automation. Like another post said, when a tractor breaks down the farmer doesn't grab a shovel. He calls his mechanic. My dad is a farmer who is 64 years old, and even he doesn't remember how to farm like his grandfather did.

Maybe when your grandpa was a farmer this was true, but today the farmer calls his mechanic. The proportion of farmers who can fix their own high tech equipment is likely not that different than the proportion of developers who can debug low level code.

School is not a real world simulator. It is a place to learn. Regardless of whether I agree with you on the morality of cheating, your reasoning is way off.

He never said he decided not to learn the material. He just made sure he wasn't at the bottom of the class when it comes time to graduate the honors, apply for grad school, or get his first job after university.

Not all examples of "playing the system" are as hypocritical as your doctor friend. Often playing the game more ethically instead of just by the rules can put you at severe disadvantages. In your anecdote the doctor is probably not at a disadvantage in his business if he didn't set up a backdoor Roth IRA, he probably would just have a $750k house instead of an $800k one. But not all situations are as clear cut.

I for instance hate how schools are funded in this country. Property taxes fund the schools, so schools in wealthy districts are much better than average. On top of this, zoning of housing ensures that only expensive houses are built in the wealthy districts, so very few lower middle class children / parents mix in with the wealthier ones. But while I hate this, I spent the extra money to live in arguably the best school district in my state (well, I didn't spend more money but I got a smaller home than I could have just 10 minutes away) I also actively oppose cheaper housing being built in my area because it could lower my home's value and lower the quality of my daughter's education. It may be slightly hypocritical, but I am going to do what is in my daughter's best interest.

These cheating school children have a similar dilemma. Rich kids can cheat the system through bribes or expensive tutors that make up for the poor education they would otherwise get. For poor kids to compete, they need to find ways of cheating that don't require money.

No, sales tax is not inherently progressive. Property taxes and sales taxes are most regressive taxes there is. Texas may make some allowances for food items, but that does almost nothing when it comes to making their tax system progressive. And while Texas is not the most regressive state, it is in the top 5.

Looking at Texas and California, for example, here is a comparison of how regressive their taxes are. Each group represents family income for non-elderly taxpayers. source

Taxes paid by:
Lowest 20% - CA 10.6%, TX 12.6%
Second 20% - CA 9.2%, TX 10.4%
Middle 20% - CA 8.2%, TX 8.6%
Fourth 20% - CA 7.6%, TX 7.4%
Next 15% - CA 7.4%, TX 6.1%
Next 4% - CA 8.7%, TX 4.9%
Top 1% - CA 8.8%, TX 3.2%

This shows the wealthy top 1% in Texas pay 64% less of their state's taxes as the wealthy in California. So while I do see why the top 20% of Texas residents really like this situation, I don't see how they sleep at night.

The Walt Disney Studios - 500 S. Buena Vista Street, Burbank, California
Walt Disney Animation Studios - 2100 W. Riverside Drive, Burbank, California
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures - 500 S. Buena Vista Street, Burbank, California
Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment - Burbank, California
Disney Interactive Studios - Glendale, California

I couldn't find one major non-theme park division of Disney headquartered in Florida, although I didn't look much harder than Wikipedia.

Perhaps you should answer the question correctly before moving to the next one.