View Poll Results: Where do you stand?

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • I don't support Andrew Yang's UBI

    33 34.74%
  • I support Andrew Yang's UBI

    62 65.26%
Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ...
8
16
17
18
19
20
... LastLast
  1. #341
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And again; so what?

    You haven't made an argument why they should work. You made an emotional appeal to this being a character defect, but that both doesn't speak to why they should be made to work, and it explains why they likely shouldn't. All you've really said is you don't like them as a person, but that's not a position you can base systemic economic policy upon.
    I'm not making a comment on policy, I'm literally just saying that I don't like them. I think they've expressed a selfish, anti-social, downright childish sentiment. You're reading too much more into it.

  2. #342
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    I don't think this is the mistake I'm making. I word harder than some and less than others, I have no delusions that amount of work correlates tightly to worth, value, or quality of life. I expect to participate in a shared system where we mitigate bad luck, differential success, and so on to provide reasonable lives to live for my countrymen that aren't as fortunate as I am. I don't object to that in any way. What I do object to is someone just openly stating that they'd like to take what I work for because they don't really want to work at all.
    My biggest complaint about a UBI is how people will react afterwards. For instance alot of people find their own self worth in whatever field they work in and once that field is automated or shipped out of the nation for cheaper labor or what have you the reason starts to creep in that they are worthless which leads to higher suicide rates/drug use among others. That is why finding dignified work is important but as we move closer to a automated world which i think will skyrocket during the next recession but since GDP is king in the US that is all that matters. The better question is at what level does the floor for the underclass need to be before you feel they get to much?

  3. #343
    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    My biggest complaint about a UBI is how people will react afterwards. For instance alot of people find their own self worth in whatever field they work in and once that field is automated or shipped out of the nation for cheaper labor or what have you the reason starts to creep in that they are worthless which leads to higher suicide rates/drug use among others. That is why finding dignified work is important but as we move closer to a automated world which i think will skyrocket during the next recession but since GDP is king in the US that is all that matters. The better question is at what level does the floor for the underclass need to be before you feel they get to much?
    I agree with the front half of this.

    I don't have a strong feeling on the question. I don't begrudge paying for a reasonable standard of living including basic healthcare, housing, and food for everyone in a rich country. The exact right quantity of spending is right seems like a technical question and I ultimately don't care that much what the number is.

    As mentioned earlier in the thread though, my main skepticism derives from a strong suspicion that people will fail to provide themselves with basic healthcare, housing, and food if there aren't programs in place that are more paternalistic than UBI. We have a fair few people that aren't good decision makers; a close friend of mine has a brother who has severely impaired executive function and he simply cannot plan ahead at all. Obviously that's an edge case, but weak executive function isn't exactly a rare trait.

  4. #344
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    I agree with the front half of this.

    I don't have a strong feeling on the question. I don't begrudge paying for a reasonable standard of living including basic healthcare, housing, and food for everyone in a rich country. The exact right quantity of spending is right seems like a technical question and I ultimately don't care that much what the number is.

    As mentioned earlier in the thread though, my main skepticism derives from a strong suspicion that people will fail to provide themselves with basic healthcare, housing, and food if there aren't programs in place that are more paternalistic than UBI. We have a fair few people that aren't good decision makers; a close friend of mine has a brother who has severely impaired executive function and he simply cannot plan ahead at all. Obviously that's an edge case, but weak executive function isn't exactly a rare trait.
    For instance if we started a UBI tomorrow would Skid Row move away? Would they gravitate towards a Greyhound bus and move to another section of the nation? This is an honest question that deserves some attention but that being said i think that some people are to far gone that no singular program or plan of action will fix. I know from my own experience i get some very decently sized dividend checks i reinvest them right away which i would likely do to a UBI. Also i am currently living in New Castle Australia should i get a US UBI even tho i am a citizen but not living in the states? Sure my home is in Cheyenne but it wont be lived in anytime soon. Those are important questions that will need a more nuanced response that we can only have if we think that a UBI is more of a boon then a burden.

    The brain function part is very real and not to sound rude or mean towards people with less cognitive functions but would a payee be the fair and or better way to approach that? Will they still find dignity in that? How will this impact those at the margins etc. Is SNAP better then a UBI because it forces those people to buy groceries ( excluding the thought that some sell the card allotment )? Its an interesting set of questions that i enjoy discussing simply because of my background in finance alone.

  5. #345
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    61,879
    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    The brain function part is very real and not to sound rude or mean towards people with less cognitive functions but would a payee be the fair and or better way to approach that? Will they still find dignity in that? How will this impact those at the margins etc. Is SNAP better then a UBI because it forces those people to buy groceries ( excluding the thought that some sell the card allotment )? Its an interesting set of questions that i enjoy discussing simply because of my background in finance alone.
    I feel the "dignity" argument just doesn't have any merit at all.

    Artists and such find dignity and value in what they do, even if it isn't financially profitable.

    Homemakers find value and dignity there, as well.

    Same for those volunteering with some organization or another.

    The fact that we try and tie self-worth and dignity to a paycheck is, itself, indicative of a deep rot within modern society. By that measure, Vincent Van Gogh was terrible failure and no one should respect anything he accomplished. Instead, he's recognized as one of the greatest artists who ever lived. And on the other side, you're saying that people like the Kardashians, who make a ton of money, have more value and dignity than a high school teacher dropping his first paycheck on school supplies for his classroom.

    I find the entire idea to be utterly ludicrous as the basis for anything.

  6. #346
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    That's an argument for the policy, but still an indictment of the character of someone that just brazenly says, "Yeah, I want to raise your taxes to give me money so I don't have to work". It's one thing to say "it's a good thing to help people who can't find work" and very different to just openly make it plain that the goal is to encourage sloth.
    i mean, the "yes." was mostly a meme. i'd have used the actual meme, but sticks are firmly in anuses about memes here.

    the main reason i don't want to work is because i kinda can't. online's the only place i can really speak with any clarity, and functioning at any normal level in public is pretty much entirely out of the question. idk what's wrong with me, but i'd most likely actually qualify for wellfare if i could go to get checked out.

    i want UBI because i'm too scared to go get check out for it though. there's several reasons i don't want to have to talk to a doctor for it, but the main is what it'd cause in my home life. someone i live with wouldn't exactly be understanding of my problem, and i can't live on my own. it's self-defeating.

  7. #347
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And again; so what?
    If you want society to give you something, you better be willing or able to give something to society. Simply existing isn't enough.

  8. #348
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    If you want society to give you something, you better be willing or able to give something to society. Simply existing isn't enough.
    Got of few red states that disagree with you.
    Acquittal doesn't mean exoneration


  9. #349
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Got of few red states that disagree with you.
    Good thing I'm not a party line whore, nor a "red" (at least insofar as current red is concerned). You seem to think I'm for whatever it is you're talking about just because of where it is or who it impacts. I assure you, I'm not.

  10. #350
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    Good thing I'm not a party line whore, nor a "red" (at least insofar as current red is concerned). You seem to think I'm for whatever it is you're talking about just because of where it is or who it impacts. I assure you, I'm not.
    Then you're the extreme minority.
    Acquittal doesn't mean exoneration


  11. #351
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I feel the "dignity" argument just doesn't have any merit at all.

    Artists and such find dignity and value in what they do, even if it isn't financially profitable.

    Homemakers find value and dignity there, as well.

    Same for those volunteering with some organization or another.

    The fact that we try and tie self-worth and dignity to a paycheck is, itself, indicative of a deep rot within modern society. By that measure, Vincent Van Gogh was terrible failure and no one should respect anything he accomplished. Instead, he's recognized as one of the greatest artists who ever lived. And on the other side, you're saying that people like the Kardashians, who make a ton of money, have more value and dignity than a high school teacher dropping his first paycheck on school supplies for his classroom.

    I find the entire idea to be utterly ludicrous as the basis for anything.
    Not all but almost every tradesman i have talked to and interacted with has had that sense of pride and self worth. It is about commanding respect and having a talent that makes you believe yourself to be better then another even in the same field. Not all mind you but i am willing to bet at the very least 30%+ do which is large enough to care about their whims at the very least.

    This is the same reason as to why you see so many struggle with mental illness and a hatred towards the other that they feel steals their employment. Without a very large world wide event equal to that of WW2 i think we will be on this same global capitalistic boat.

  12. #352
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    If you want society to give you something, you better be willing or able to give something to society. Simply existing isn't enough.
    Why? Please explain it to me. The first world has the resources to make comfortable dignified living a birthright of its citizens. Why is it immoral to do so?

  13. #353
    Quote Originally Posted by DisposableHero View Post
    Why? Please explain it to me. The first world has the resources to make comfortable dignified living a birthright of its citizens. Why is it immoral to do so?
    Morality has nothing to do with it. That dignified living comes from somewhere and someone. Personally, I'm not willing to work without getting something in return, and that also means I'm not willing to provide for someone who isn't willing to attempt to provide something themselves. I'd sooner kick them out of my society. There is no room for free-loaders.

    One more time in simpler fashion:

    I'm not putting in anything unless I'm getting something in return. Free loaders are getting something from me without giving anything in return. Ergo, I decline to participate.

  14. #354
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    I'm not making a comment on policy, I'm literally just saying that I don't like them. I think they've expressed a selfish, anti-social, downright childish sentiment. You're reading too much more into it.
    Is it any more antisocial and selfish than a handful of people having the resources of half the population of our country? Do you think that one person does more work in a day than half the country combined? Honestly if somebody does not want to work and thinks they can live on 12k a year I say to them good luck and try not to starve.

  15. #355
    Quote Originally Posted by kaid View Post
    Is it any more antisocial and selfish than a handful of people having the resources of half the population of our country? Do you think that one person does more work in a day than half the country combined? Honestly if somebody does not want to work and thinks they can live on 12k a year I say to them good luck and try not to starve.
    Do I think those billionaires CURRENTLY are worth how much they have? No. They're protected by favorable laws that disproportionately protect them and unnaturally alter markets in their favor.

    HOWEVER

    I can entirely see someone rising to near the same levels of wealth in a free market, and to that I'd say.. yeah. if society thinks whatever that person has done deserves that much wealth, then clearly they are doing something more valuable than an entire half of the country combined.

  16. #356
    But free markets have proven time and time again that they don't benefit society at all.
    People need to stop with the Ayn Rand shit.
    We already seen what Robber Barons are. And Teddy "trustbuster" Roosevelt dealt with them as politicians should be doing today.
    Last edited by Shadowferal; 2019-12-14 at 02:02 AM.
    Acquittal doesn't mean exoneration


  17. #357
    Quote Originally Posted by DisposableHero View Post
    Why? Please explain it to me. The first world has the resources to make comfortable dignified living a birthright of its citizens. Why is it immoral to do so?
    Where do those resources come from?

  18. #358
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    61,879
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    If you want society to give you something, you better be willing or able to give something to society. Simply existing isn't enough.
    They already contribute via paying taxes (there's more than income tax) and through acting as a consumer.

    The idea that they're not contributing to society is a deliberate lie, and it's one made with malicious intent, to justify policies explicitly designed to increase human suffering.

    So you'll forgive me if I don't take that argument seriously. Because it shouldn't be, by any rational human being.

    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    Not all but almost every tradesman i have talked to and interacted with has had that sense of pride and self worth.
    I didn't say working a job couldn't provide you with self-worth and dignity.

    But ask yourself if the same "self worth and dignity" is true of the young woman who's stripping to support herself and her young daughter, because she can make more money that way than otherwise.

    Ask yourself if it applies to the high school graduate working the night shift at the 7-11 so he can afford college.

    Or the new college graduate who's taking a job as a barista because there aren't any jobs in their field of specialization right now, even though it's a pay cut of about 70% of what they should be earning, because the student loan people need to get paid.

    The idea that jobs are always people's source of self-worth and dignity is, frankly, bullshit. You're cherry-picking the few for whom that's true and pretending that applies to everyone, and it flatly doesn't.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    Morality has nothing to do with it. That dignified living comes from somewhere and someone. Personally, I'm not willing to work without getting something in return, and that also means I'm not willing to provide for someone who isn't willing to attempt to provide something themselves. I'd sooner kick them out of my society. There is no room for free-loaders.
    Bragging about how you support enslaving people against their will definitely means that morality has a lot to do with your position. Specifically, the lack of any moral code whatsoever.

  19. #359
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBoo View Post
    I'm not putting in anything unless I'm getting something in return. Free loaders are getting something from me without giving anything in return. Ergo, I decline to participate.
    So like, infrastructure and utilities of all kinds, the rule of law, political franchise, and the same basic income schema as everyone else (the U in UBI is Universal after all) is nothing? You get the same from taxes as everyone else. What you get from working is the currency to buy luxuries which those who don't work in this theoretical scenario don't get.

  20. #360
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    They already contribute via paying taxes (there's more than income tax) and through acting as a consumer.

    The idea that they're not contributing to society is a deliberate lie, and it's one made with malicious intent, to justify policies explicitly designed to increase human suffering.

    So you'll forgive me if I don't take that argument seriously. Because it shouldn't be, by any rational human being.
    I usually think you a rational poster, but you didn't think this one through.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •