4 ms·

Nothing is inherently wrong with the job per se, it's that the general acceptance of a commoditized workforce is dangerous in that it circumvents many other pro

Nothing is inherently wrong with the job per se, it's that the general acceptance of a commoditized workforce is dangerous in that it circumvents many other protections offered by regular jobs (not that those are that much better) in disguise because it has a relatively high hourly rate. Your effective hourly rate after paying for health insurance plus other company provided benefits is likely much closer to normal rates. Basic income is a method to prevent wage slavery* as well as many other negative side affects of having to work to try and provide even the basic necessities (shelter and food). This job would be awesome in the world of basic income because people wouldn't have to worry about how they are going to feed themselves, but would be able to work extra to be able to afford the quality of life they prefer. Basic income is about rebalancing the power structures between employer and employee, and giving the power back to the people without it (the employees.) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery

ekianjo 11y ago
> basic income this is not the place for discussing this here, but the inherent problem with this basic income idea is that there's no way to provide such money in developed countries which are already indebted to the bone. Unless you decide to seize savings and declare the country a communist dictatorship or something.
- LesZedCB 11y ago
  Well, since you decided to discuss it anyway... :) Basic income is wealth redistribution function. There is a massive income inequality problem in the US (a trivial google search will reveal, if you aren't aware of already), and a basic income would rebalance taxes as well as replace some other social programs in order to pay for it. See this reddit post for more info about income inequality and taxes. https://www.reddit.com/r/BasicIncome/comments/3mqnyg/how_income_inequality_affects_taxes/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BasicIncome/comments/3mqnyg/how_inc...
  - ekianjo 11y ago
    > Wealth redistribution Well you spelled it, you need a communist like system to do that (i.e. take money through taxes, redistribute it through massive inefficiencies, and make sure politicians get their hefty share when the money flows). Inequality is a false problem. It's a problem if people get poorer, but all indicators for the past 50 years show that everyone is getting richer, while rich ones are getting richer faster (which is obvious why, when you have more capital you are much more likely to increase it faster). As long as even the modest classes are getting richer every generation, everyone's life is improving.
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      > redistribute it through massive inefficiencies Actually, if a state does any welfare, it probably has this problem already. Basic income offers significant reductions in those inefficiencies by simplifying the process of selecting eligible people (and retiring the required bureaucracy). > and make sure politicians get their hefty share when the money flows That you have under every system, from despotism to socialism to capitalist democracy. > Inequality is a false problem. It's a problem if people get poorer, but all indicators for the past 50 years show that everyone is getting richer, while rich ones are getting richer faster (which is obvious why, when you have more capital you are much more likely to increase it faster). As long as even the modest classes are getting richer every generation, everyone's life is improving. Inequality will be a false problem when the bottom level of society won't be starving to death or due to lack of basic health care. Again, basic income proposes turning inequality into a non-problem by securing a decent, humane minimum level for everyone.
      - ekianjo 11y ago
        > Actually, if a state does any welfare, it probably has this problem already. Basic income offers significant reductions in those inefficiencies by simplifying the process of selecting eligible people (and retiring the required bureaucracy). Never been proven that UBI would reduce the inefficiencies. The State find ways to be inefficient even when it's not supposed to be. > That you have under every system, from despotism to socialism to capitalist democracy. Nope, if you did not have a Big government doing wealth redistribution in the first place you would not have much money being lost in such transactions because the flow would be very limited. Look at the US Federal budget, how humongous it has become. > Inequality will be a false problem when the bottom level of society won't be starving to death or due to lack of basic health care. Oh come on. Mass starvation is a thing of the past, check Wikipedia, the last starvations happened more than 30 years ago and the only recent ones are due to conflicts mainly - poor people do not die anymore of hunger anywhere - we have large amounts of excess food, even in the poorest places of the world, like the countrysides of China. > Again, basic income proposes turning inequality into a non-problem by securing a decent, humane minimum level for everyone. The advocates of UBI fail to understand that by raising the minimum earnings to everyone, you will probably make prices go up everywhere (increased taxes + prices adjustments based on purchasing power) so it won't result in any meaningful difference.

ekianjo 11y ago

> basic income this is not the place for discussing this here, but the inherent problem with this basic income idea is that there's no way to provide such money in developed countries which are already indebted to the bone. Unless you decide to seize savings and declare the country a communist dictatorship or something.

LesZedCB 11y ago
Well, since you decided to discuss it anyway... :) Basic income is wealth redistribution function. There is a massive income inequality problem in the US (a trivial google search will reveal, if you aren't aware of already), and a basic income would rebalance taxes as well as replace some other social programs in order to pay for it. See this reddit post for more info about income inequality and taxes. https://www.reddit.com/r/BasicIncome/comments/3mqnyg/how_income_inequality_affects_taxes/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BasicIncome/comments/3mqnyg/how_inc...
- ekianjo 11y ago
  > Wealth redistribution Well you spelled it, you need a communist like system to do that (i.e. take money through taxes, redistribute it through massive inefficiencies, and make sure politicians get their hefty share when the money flows). Inequality is a false problem. It's a problem if people get poorer, but all indicators for the past 50 years show that everyone is getting richer, while rich ones are getting richer faster (which is obvious why, when you have more capital you are much more likely to increase it faster). As long as even the modest classes are getting richer every generation, everyone's life is improving.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    > redistribute it through massive inefficiencies Actually, if a state does any welfare, it probably has this problem already. Basic income offers significant reductions in those inefficiencies by simplifying the process of selecting eligible people (and retiring the required bureaucracy). > and make sure politicians get their hefty share when the money flows That you have under every system, from despotism to socialism to capitalist democracy. > Inequality is a false problem. It's a problem if people get poorer, but all indicators for the past 50 years show that everyone is getting richer, while rich ones are getting richer faster (which is obvious why, when you have more capital you are much more likely to increase it faster). As long as even the modest classes are getting richer every generation, everyone's life is improving. Inequality will be a false problem when the bottom level of society won't be starving to death or due to lack of basic health care. Again, basic income proposes turning inequality into a non-problem by securing a decent, humane minimum level for everyone.
    - ekianjo 11y ago
      > Actually, if a state does any welfare, it probably has this problem already. Basic income offers significant reductions in those inefficiencies by simplifying the process of selecting eligible people (and retiring the required bureaucracy). Never been proven that UBI would reduce the inefficiencies. The State find ways to be inefficient even when it's not supposed to be. > That you have under every system, from despotism to socialism to capitalist democracy. Nope, if you did not have a Big government doing wealth redistribution in the first place you would not have much money being lost in such transactions because the flow would be very limited. Look at the US Federal budget, how humongous it has become. > Inequality will be a false problem when the bottom level of society won't be starving to death or due to lack of basic health care. Oh come on. Mass starvation is a thing of the past, check Wikipedia, the last starvations happened more than 30 years ago and the only recent ones are due to conflicts mainly - poor people do not die anymore of hunger anywhere - we have large amounts of excess food, even in the poorest places of the world, like the countrysides of China. > Again, basic income proposes turning inequality into a non-problem by securing a decent, humane minimum level for everyone. The advocates of UBI fail to understand that by raising the minimum earnings to everyone, you will probably make prices go up everywhere (increased taxes + prices adjustments based on purchasing power) so it won't result in any meaningful difference.