"Sorry we are closed nobody wants to work here anymore due to government handouts"

[Endus]

How are they supposed to pay for new education/learning trades without money?

Not to mention the difficulty in learning most trades remotely; hands-on practice is practically essential to the process. And the whole reason people are avoiding working shitty jobs is . . . the fact there's a global fucking pandemic with a pretty decent mortality rate and high infectiousnes, so putting yourself at that kind of risk is something people are avoiding.

So sure; people without money who are avoiding employment out of COVID concerns are totally going to spend money they don't have on trade school training that requires them to put themselves at COVID risk.

[Glorious Leader]

That's easily the dumbest shit I've read on here for a while.

Yeah no, the average Wall Street dude is a parasite on society, gambling other people's money and reaping the benefits while paying off politicians so that they immunize them from the consequences.

I'm not even arguing for UBI. I'm arguing that ANYONE working 40 hours a week should be able to afford basic things like -water- and -food- and -shelter-

I agree. I thought it was fairly clearly sarcasm especially if you read the entire post. Finance is a bloated vampire squid.

[Belize]

I agree. I thought it was fairly clearly sarcasm especially if you read the entire post.

Given the amount of people that are actually, actively shilling for large corporations and for keeping poor people poor, I've honestly stopped putting in the energy to decipher sarcasm or not. Maybe it's on me, but *shrug*

[Kokolums]

There is a saying "Idle hands are the devil's workshop". That references the idea that when people have nothing to do, they tend to start causing trouble out of boredom. Large numbers of people with no job getting free money from the government via UBI to live is simply not going to work unless its a police state. You'll just see large scale riots, looting, crime, etc. Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

[Edge-]

There is a saying "Idle hands are the devil's workshop".

There's another old saying, "A watched pot never boils." that I think is about as accurate. In that it's not remotely accurate and is akin to that time when folks thought that being left-handed meant you had the devil inside you.

Large numbers of people with no job getting free money from the government via UBI to live is simply not going to work unless its a police state.

Citation needed*

Because spoilers: It's usually fairly successful, and at worst isn't remotely harmful and doesn't cause what you claim - https://www.npr.org/2021/03/04/97365...ff-study-finds

Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

That had nothing to do with a UBI, which Americans didn't even have during covid.

[uuuhname]

Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

no my dude, that was people actually protesting against the police state.

it also needs to pointed out how European countries did intact a UBI and their economies rebounded the best.

[Endus]

There is a saying "Idle hands are the devil's workshop". That references the idea that when people have nothing to do, they tend to start causing trouble out of boredom. Large numbers of people with no job getting free money from the government via UBI to live is simply not going to work unless its a police state. You'll just see large scale riots, looting, crime, etc. Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

Beyond what Edge- already said about this being malarkey, nothing about a UBI means people will "have nothing to do". It means they'll have the time and finances to explore their own interests. And someone taking an art class or playing the latest Call of Duty is not someone who is "idle", so your malarkey folk "wisdom" doesn't even apply properly in the first place.

Americans have some of the longest work hours and lack of vacation of any developed nation, meaning they're the least "idle". And yet, the USA's crime rates are through the goddamned roof. Any cursory look at facts would've told you your position was nonsense, but why bother checking the facts, right?

[Glorious Leader]

Beyond what Edge- already said about this being malarkey, nothing about a UBI means people will "have nothing to do". It means they'll have the time and finances to explore their own interests. And someone taking an art class or playing the latest Call of Duty is not someone who is "idle", so your malarkey folk "wisdom" doesn't even apply properly in the first place.

Americans have some of the longest work hours and lack of vacation of any developed nation, meaning they're the least "idle". And yet, the USA's crime rates are through the goddamned roof. Any cursory look at facts would've told you your position was nonsense, but why bother checking the facts, right?

Ironically enough it means people have actually freedom to choose. Not that Friedman bullshit that they tried to sell in the 80s.

[Endus]

Ironically enough it means people have actually freedom to choose. Not that Friedman bullshit that they tried to sell in the 80s.

More and more, it becomes clear that the pro-Capitalist stance is just about treating people as useful cogs for the Machine, and if a cog breaks, just chuck it in the bin and get a new cog.

Treating people like human beings who have interest in their own self-actualization? Then I don't see how you still support the capitalist model.

[Zan15]

More and more, it becomes clear that the pro-Capitalist stance is just about treating people as useful cogs for the Machine, and if a cog breaks, just chuck it in the bin and get a new cog.

Treating people like human beings who have interest in their own self-actualization? Then I don't see how you still support the capitalist model.

...and making taxpayers pay for the cost of taking care of the broken cogs.....

Now they don't even want to pay the waste charge "unemployment"

[Mihalik]

There is a saying "Idle hands are the devil's workshop". That references the idea that when people have nothing to do, they tend to start causing trouble out of boredom. Large numbers of people with no job getting free money from the government via UBI to live is simply not going to work unless its a police state. You'll just see large scale riots, looting, crime, etc. Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

Don't you ever get tired of being consistently wrong about absolutely everything while fetishizing large scale violence?

[Krakan]

What, you mean not having to scrape by in a shitty job just to survive frees you up to potentially pursue something more meaningful?

Fascinating.

It's almost like that's exactly what proponents of some form of UBI have been saying all along.

I wont claim it isn't a benefit of it the question becomes how many will. At the end of the day I don't believe you can run an economy long term paying people more then their labor demands. Perhaps a system where you work x number of years you have a trade course paid for by the government could work but I'm against the notion of ubi.

[Zan15]

There is a saying "Idle hands are the devil's workshop". That references the idea that when people have nothing to do, they tend to start causing trouble out of boredom. Large numbers of people with no job getting free money from the government via UBI to live is simply not going to work unless its a police state. You'll just see large scale riots, looting, crime, etc. Actually we already saw that in a few short months of covid lockdowns.

you had multiple years of massive unemployment in this country where people had nothing to do but pray for a job. This has happened time and time again throughout the decades.

No large scale riots, looting and crime increase related to this "boredom".

and this was all with half of your pay in unemployment that only lasted 26-50 weeks.

Paying them more will cause this doom you speak of?

[Edge-]

paying people more then their labor demands.

Is there some kind of universal formula for determining the "right" amount of compensation for labor?

[Endus]

I wont claim it isn't a benefit of it the question becomes how many will. At the end of the day I don't believe you can run an economy long term paying people more then their labor demands. Perhaps a system where you work x number of years you have a trade course paid for by the government could work but I'm against the notion of ubi.

The problem is that your entire claim here is just a circular argument.

You devalue labor.
Then you argue that you can't pay labor more because of how you've already devalued labor.

That isn't an argument. It's just "fuck you, got mine".

Any economic "theory" predicated on nonsense like this can just be summarily discarded as irrelevant fantasizing.

[Krakan]

Is there some kind of universal formula for determining the "right" amount of compensation for labor?

It's a competition between what the lowest the company can pay vs what the worker will accept

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that your entire claim here is just a circular argument.

You devalue labor.
Then you argue that you can't pay labor more because of how you've already devalued labor.

That isn't an argument. It's just "fuck you, got mine".

Any economic "theory" predicated on nonsense like this can just be summarily discarded as irrelevant fantasizing.

It's the reality of the market... its absurdity to try and claim its fantasy.

[Endus]

Is there some kind of universal formula for determining the "right" amount of compensation for labor?

If we're honest and ethical, then we have to treat them as both human beings and as equipment the employer needs to maintain. If you only do the latter, you're saying that working people to death, making children work, paying starvation wages, all that stuff's "okay". And we can discard your opinion as just straight evil.

So this sets some standards;
1> Every human being should be able to live in at least a modicum of comfort. This means food, shelter, clothing, services, some modicum of entertainment, etc. If you don't agree with this, then your point of view is predicated on an intended level of human suffering and subjugation, and we can discard your opinion as just straight evil.
2> The amount in #1 is called a "living wage".
3> Families have to exist, so said living wage has to cover children, and if you're not supporting a spouse, then you need to be supporting child care and such.
4> If you want to maintain your employees in good health as a responsible employer, you should thus be paying that living wage, at a minimum. Any less, and you're expecting the government to pick up your slack, on the taxpayer's dime, which is abusive self-interest. Or you want your employees to suffer, in which case, yeah, we're back to "evil".

So now we've set a floor. You need to achieve a living wage. Anything short is a position fundamentally predicated on the idea that some people should just suffer, so that the rest of us can be better off. We can debate whether it's better to push for a minimum living wage, or (my preference) a UBI that sets the living wage standard for everyone directly and thus unshackles employment standards a fair bit (with the caveat that workers have MUCH more capacity to just say "fuck off, nah" to bad offers).

But the idea that the status quo is ethical and responsible? Nah. It's still carrying echoes and presumptions of the industrial revolution. The whole system is just strapped along with band-aid fixes over the most excessive failures of policy. It's never done the job, and we should stop pretending it ever could.

- - - Updated - - -

It's a competition between what the lowest the company can pay vs what the worker will accept

Companies can nearly always offer more. Prices are fungible. The basic needs of a human being are not.

It's the reality of the market... its absurdity to try and claim its fantasy.

"The market" is just a human creation. There are no rules to it other than those we choose to create and establish. If we don't like how it works, we can just . . . change it. It's that fucking simple. It's how we went from barter, to early agrarian markets, to feudal systems, to mercantilism, to capitalism and communism in the modern era and their multiple concurrent variations. Markets are human fictions, not unchanging rules of nature.

Pretending otherwise, that's a fantasy.

[Edge-]

It's a competition between what the lowest the company can pay vs what the worker will accept

And workers are saying they're not willing to accept these low wages, so you came in to oddly claim that they're demanding to be paid more than "their labor demands", as if there's some "real" number there and not the constant battle between companies wanting lower wages and workers wanting higher wages.

[Krakan]

And workers are saying they're not willing to accept these low wages, so you came in to oddly claim that they're demanding to be paid more than "their labor demands", as if there's some "real" number there and not the constant battle between companies wanting lower wages and workers wanting higher wages.

I'm pointing out how temporary the situation we find ourselves in is. I would comment on @Endus post but I would fall under evil by his definition.

Right now the easiest way to see this problem is as a scale. On one side of it is labor supply. The other labor demand.

For decades now a hand has been on the supply side every pushing it downward by flooding the market with increasing unskilled labor further and further diminishing the demand making labor cheaper and cheaper. (Automation plays a large role as well but I'm speaking broadly on policy.

You would propose placing a hand on the other end of the scale forcing higher wages and driving inflation to further diminish buying power. There has been some sharp increases though I admit it's been relegated to luxury good s for the most part with slight increases to necessities.

I would propose removing both hands from the scale and letting demand and supply naturally balance. It would mark me as evil though by endus's logic but it would be the most sustainable way forward.

[Edge-]

I'm pointing out how temporary the situation we find ourselves in is. I would comment on @Endus post but I would fall under evil by his definition.

Temporary in that these safety nets are likely to dry up, forcing people to take jobs that pay shit because they have no alternative?

It may not be temporary for all we know, it could continue until there's enough pressure to force wages up for many companies.

For decades now a hand has been on the supply side every pushing it downward by flooding the market with increasing unskilled labor further and further diminishing the demand making labor cheaper and cheaper. (Automation plays a large role as well but I'm speaking broadly on policy.

This is such a massive oversimplification I don't even know where to begin, and ignores the realities of the insane profits (not revenue, post-tax profits) that these companies regularly post in part because they pay their workers like shit and exploit them.

You would propose placing a hand on the other end of the scale forcing higher wages and driving inflation to further diminish buying power. There has been some sharp increases though I admit it's been relegated to luxury good s for the most part with slight increases to necessities.

Not at all. As-is, the hand has been placed on the "supply" side and they have all the negotiating power. A UBI would equal those scales, since people no longer are forced to take shitty, low-paying jobs simply to survive. There's zero evidence that it would diminish buying power in any meaningful way, and we've heard the cries of, "OH BUT TACO BELL WOULD COST $20 IN DC!" despite the fact that there is, again, zero evidence based on the fact that Taco Bell charges largely the same prices in places where it already pays higher wages.