"Basic Income" is a terrible idea

[endersblade]

I view a basic income as exactly that. It pays your bare necessity expenditures. Rent. Utilities, and Food. Not your car, not your phone, not your clothes, not your TV, not your video games.

In NJ, that could be a basic income of $700-900 a month pending on the neighborhood you live in. If you want anything besides just staring at a wall, eating small meals, and sleeping on the floor. Then you need to get a job.

Same in Portland, OR. 7-900 a month wouldn't even pay rent in most places here. But it would definitely pay off the rest of my bills. (Also, I consider phones to be a necessity - kinda hard to get a job if nobody can call you.) Hell, even if we were given $500 a month, that would let me finally fucking BREATHE between paychecks. As it stands, at least when I had a job, I'd get paid and then 90+% of it would go to bills and such. I hardly had any money left for 'fun', and sometimes not even enough for food.

So one of two things needs to start happening: The minimum wage gets brought up to a LIVABLE wage (and we can argue all fucking day long on what that would be), or implement this basic allowance. Otherwise the number of people on welfare and/or living on the streets is just going to start increasing.

[Azadina]

A o you think we should punish families who provide for their children?

"earn it all yourself, or you're useless leech" Wasn't my idea.

[Dug]

Wouldn't that be ideal though Alturic? No longer a need for money because societies robots provide us with everything we need in the most efficient way possible? Or are we still in the no fun allowed zone?

[alexw]

I'm curious who exactly you think is going to be "overseeing this system"? The current burger flippers and fry tenders? Doesn't this all come back ot get a job/bettering yourself?

I see you answered none of my points. Come on do so if you can. As for overseers there will naturally be some small percentage of the population required to oversee it and they will have increased lifestyles over those on UBI with increased status as a result.

And again how do 50%+ of the population get a better job when their current work is automated and whatever new work appears can already be done faster/better/cheaper by a robot?

Instead of continually screaming get a job lazy scroungers! how exactly do you intend to deal with the problem in a realistic manner? No matter how much you stamp your foot this future is still coming.

[Theinquisition]

Not real hot on giving away money for doing nothing.

[alturic]

"hurrr slippery slope durrr"

Providing housing and free healthcare is demonstratably cheaper than having to foot the bills of people who are sick all the time from exposure and untreated health problems when they end up wheeled to ER.

I suggest you either admit that you'd rather shoot poor people out of principle than give them such horrible commie treatments as free healthcare and minimum income...

Or you buckle up and shut it, because the latter is the only correct answer from both economical and ethical standpoints.

If "shoot poor people" would mean be completely against my taxes going to pay for my next door neighbor to get free food, section 8, healthcare, etc for the rest of their lives? Than yea.

I guess I'm a dick. Then again, perhaps it's because I grew up poor, didn't have a father figure, and ended up working for "the man" from 18-22 when I started my own business and "made it" in life.

[alexw]

Wouldn't that be ideal though Alturic? No longer a need for money because societies robots provide us with everything we need in the most efficient way possible? Or are we still in the no fun allowed zone?

No we should force 49.5% of society to continually dig holes and force the other 49.5% to continually fill them in because the richest 1% don't like it.

[Endus]

And this is EXACTLY why this basic income shit is insanely idiotic. This guy right here is EXACTLY what logical adults realize will happen.

Why is that a problem? What it means is that nobody is driven by hardship into taking a wage they don't feel is worthwhile. You are literally complaining about the labor market becoming a free market for once.

The labor in question would still need to get done, so employers would have to increase benefits/perks/wages enough to make people want that job, rather than relying on people's desperation to force them into accepting it. Which is how people currently get stuck in jobs they hate.

[Bosen]

It's easy to shoot the idea down if you're someone who doesn't need it. Hard times happen and sometimes,all you need is for a few things to go right for you,like having an address,food and a place to rest.

[alturic]

It's easy to shoot the idea down if you're someone who doesn't need it. Hard times happen and sometimes,all you need is for a few things to go right for you,like having an address,food and a place to rest.

And this is exactly what the US welfare systems were originally intended for. Temporary help.

[Gamdwelf]

Tyrianth seems to think people can't, for some reason, do what they enjoy now.

I have not been able to make money doing what I enjoy.

[LazarusLong]

Works just fine in Star Trek.

[Tyrianth]

Works just fine in Star Trek.

Star Trek doesn't have Basic Income, they have done away with currency altogether. ;p

[Theinquisition]

It's easy to shoot the idea down if you're someone who doesn't need it. Hard times happen and sometimes,all you need is for a few things to go right for you,like having an address,food and a place to rest.

I'm absolutely for Social net programs that help people when they need it the most and get them back on their feet.

I see SN programs like a circus trapeze net.

Occasionally someone makes a mistake, falls and is saved by it. they are a little embarrassed, but okay, shake themselves off and get back to work.

The problem I have it with the people who fall into the net, sit there on their cell phone not moving, and bitch when someone asks them to get off.

[alexw]

I don't see how that makes any sense as all.... if productivety rises at the same cost to the producer then products would become cheaper. Basic income wouldn't need to increase so that people can buy more. If anything basic income would decrease as cost of living would be cheaper.

And even if your scenario is right then what's the big deal? Assuming that's the system could support it I would personally would love to see a society where people only have to work a couple hours a week to live happy lives.

- - - Updated - - -



He likes overpaying for healthcare both out of his own pocket and out of the governments tax money apparantly.

Generally for reasons of generating positive inflation societies prefer rising incomes and constant/rising prices to falling prices and stationary incomes, though the end result is kind-of the same. One just happens via an inflationary manner the other deflationary. However deflation comes with some nasty side effects we dislike.

[Theinquisition]

Works just fine in Star Trek.

Let me know when we have matter replicators.

- - - Updated - - -

I have not been able to make money doing what I enjoy.

that's life.

find a hobby you can make a little money from and build it from there. The VAST majority of the population doesn't wake up excited to go to work.

[frogger237]

The reason Basic Income is being looked at is not so much to tax the rich, but as a solution for unemployable people after automation has taken on a bigger segment of the economy.

So for instance Truck Drivers that will be put out of work, and cannot get a different job, food service workers, etc.

The other solutions are large decreases in population to compensate, or heading down a dystopian society like Elysium. Where the rich are really rich and few, and the poor are little better than cannon fodder used to oil the gears of the economy for the rich.

^ This, plus its not like the people getting a basic income would be hoarding the money they get, they would be spending it. It would be going straight back into their local economy which is alot better than giving money to some wealthy guy who invests it into a foreign company which makes him more wealthy but does nothing for the local economy unless you tax him more.

[Bosen]

And this is exactly what the US welfare systems were originally intended for. Temporary help.

The actual aid that gives doesn't meet basic need. People with children fare better,but if you're a single homeless guy,you're fucked. Cash aid in CA is a one time/one month thing. A little north of $500.,I believe.

You can be living in your car and if you get a $13.00 an hour job,they cut your food stamps. You can never get out of your situation.

[Azadina]

Not real hot on giving away money for doing nothing.

Would you agree in CEO's getting the so called "golden handshakes"? Many years salary for having screwed up, then getting "fired" as a result. Or is it just for the "low people" who should get nothing?

[Dug]

I'm absolutely for Social net programs that help people when they need it the most and get them back on their feet.

I see SN programs like a circus trapeze net.

Occasionally someone makes a mistake, falls and is saved by it. they are a little embarrassed, but okay, shake themselves off and get back to work.

The problem I have it with the people who fall into the net, sit there on their cell phone not moving, and bitch when someone asks them to get off.

But why does that bother you? They fall in the net and decide to stay there "on their phone", jeez what a fulfilling life, right? While you, continue to work and get all this extra income to spend on super nice/fun things that that person doesn't have because they're okay with the bare minimum. Unless you just don't think people should get a bare minimum if they refuse to work. They suffer in the end by having a lame life but at least they're not starving to death.