When you write enough materials, the AI generated output started becoming less generic and actually interesting. Really cool. Still wouldn't use the generated output. The ideas, yes, but not the words.

I write every single word. It's not a shortcut by any means. Just means that your work can be narratively and technically more rigorous. Using AI to generate stories for you defeat the purpose.

If it didn't take you at least an hour to create something worthwhile, it's likely that you generated slop.

A sortition panel collecting random people from all walks of life to give feedback on law would probably improve the quality of law more than any amount of procedure and paperwork ever will.

We mistaken paperwork with deliberation and quality control.

It has been recognized by early Georgists as monopolistic and thus problematic.

That's why you see rent seeking behaviors and abuses. It's not new.

But the real magic happens in CAD while printers are good enough that it gets out of your way.

For example fact checking a news article and making sure what's get reported line up with base reality.

I once fact check a virology lecture and found out that the professor confused two brothers as one individual.

I am sure about the professor having a super solid grasp of how viruses work, but errors like these probably creeps in all the time.

The result is that return on effort are reduced. That mean labor, entrepreneurs, and capital bear the burden of supporting government budgets as opposed to landowners who benefit from the economic activity making their land valuable.

Taxes as a rule discourages whatever get taxed. The exception to this is land, because land isn't created. It already exists in nature.

Don't tax what people make, tax what people took.

Government provides crucial services that increases land value, offsetting any losses in tax revenue through public utility. Perhaps the same thing can happen with historical buildings.

However, let us note that cities are for living in. It is not a museum.

Ultimately, only the public can determine the balance of concerns to be struck.

There is some opposite momentum toward the land value tax, which is a good thing, but these are less visible and likely weaker than a tax revolt by landowners.

Eventually, if the current trend continue for property taxes, we will see a disruption in government funding for basic service, and the contraction of the economy through increased taxation of economic activity to compensate for lost revenue from property taxes. It will be a disaster.

This is the endgame of the expansion of land ownership in the post WW2 era. Exemption from property taxes worsen this crisis.

You need to solve the contradiction within the economy in order to make UBI works.

The current way our taxation policy work is to tax labor and capital, which is the basis of our economy, while flinching away from taxing land, which derives much of its value from the surrounding economic activity rather than an owner's effort.

By the way, the UBI is an old idea. In the 19th century, it was known as the Citizen's Dividend.

Instead, focus on taxing scarce resources, especially since we cannot make more of it. If it's natural resources coming out of the grounds such as minerals and oil, it becomes a severance tax.

If we're talking about occupying land, then it's a Land Value Tax.

You could also tax negative externalities like pollution or traffic congestion.This is known as a Piguovian tax.

In any case, you might be interested in Georgism, which is an anti-monopoly ideology most famously associated with very Strong Opinions on taxation of land and natural resources and untaxing production, along with taxation on pollution and negative externalities.

My impression is that sortition is very much in vogue within Georgist circles.

Pessimism that leads to a self fulfilling prophecy is irrational, but you still need a win. A win is fuel.