4 ms·

"just give cash" is sufficient, because the other things are just as likely to be fall-out from the bad choices that may have been the best of a bad situation

"just give cash" is sufficient, because the other things are just as likely to be fall-out from the bad choices that may have been the best of a bad situation (heroin usage, dealing, theft, etc, etc...). There is another comment below about giving in-kind stuff instead of the more fungible cash, but the problems with that (and with your example) boil down to that being moralizing. People want to moralize rather than enable. If a person has the means and doesn't use them, then and only then, can we claim some other problems remain to be fixed, but we cannot even logically conclude that the problems are blocking something debatably-desirable at this point. We can't have a non-armchair/inherently-smug-and-preachy discussion until everyone has a basic income. This problem isn't going away, and is only for lack of numbers. Even someone who wants to die by heroin would be better off being allowed to, than forcing them to harm others (or themselves differently) in order to get there.

asuffield 11y ago
I'm sorry, I don't think you fully understood my point, as you appear to be presenting arguments against making financial support conditional on other things, which I was not endorsing here (that is a whole barrel of complicated which I don't want to open). My point was rather than a financial-assistance-only approach is insufficient: we also need, at minimum, strong education and healthcare support, because there clearly exist groups of people who need them.
- ryandamm 11y ago
  In other words, in addition to a basic guaranteed income, we should consider universal health care and public education. I agree with that collection of policies, based on my understanding of current economic thinking and research.
wycx 11y ago
How about giving people money, and if they are a heroin addict, let them have access to free heroin as well. I would imagine that a stable supply of the substance to which one is addicted, plus money off which to live, would form an excellent foundation for being a non-destructive member of society.
- mnre4kgnk4eg 11y ago
  A case could certainly be made for providing easier, socially-accepted access to such substances, on individual humanitarian grounds, but also on the grounds that the current proprietors are majorly-violent criminals who are already at the extremes (who, rather than die/"go home", said "fuck it" and "went big"). The way things are, substantial capital is already flowing to murderers and other violent or tangibly-wrong actors. I think it's reasonable to expect non-profit distribution would cut into that, which sounds appealing.
vixen99 11y ago
Just who is 'moralizing','smug and preachy' here? 'People want to moralize rather than enable'. Gosh! That's the debate over isn't it? Don't review current and awaited evidence just 'enable'. Purely anecdotal but please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities (and a big thank you to whoever is continuing them for my sake). Fortunately I'm an odd-ball and no one else anywhere would even think to behave as I would. So, my story is not only anecdotal but completely irrelevant.
- mnre4kgnk4eg 11y ago
  > please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities Interestingly, I keep reading HN and sometimes pause to make a new account with 0 karma, in order to contribute (hopefully) compelling comments and conversation when I am so inspired to, despite the karma/profit-motive. I actually think the presence of karma encourages me to be argumentative and act out indulgently, self-destructively, and even anti-socially, in the same way I see people in poverty do.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  > Purely anecdotal but please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities (and a big thank you to whoever is continuing them for my sake). Fortunately I'm an odd-ball and no one else anywhere would even think to behave as I would. So, my story is not only anecdotal but completely irrelevant. You'll get bored shitless after a week of doing nothing with your life improvements to make a point, and suddenly you'll be back here having a productive input in the society, be it arts or engineering, services or thinking. But maybe you do really want to make a point and decide to just drink and be merry. That would still be a significant improvement for the society over having you perform "economic activity" in advertising or other bullshit industry we keep because we're too big on puritan values to even consider that slaving away your life for food and shelter isn't the optimal way of living.

asuffield 11y ago

I'm sorry, I don't think you fully understood my point, as you appear to be presenting arguments against making financial support conditional on other things, which I was not endorsing here (that is a whole barrel of complicated which I don't want to open). My point was rather than a financial-assistance-only approach is insufficient: we also need, at minimum, strong education and healthcare support, because there clearly exist groups of people who need them.

ryandamm 11y ago
In other words, in addition to a basic guaranteed income, we should consider universal health care and public education. I agree with that collection of policies, based on my understanding of current economic thinking and research.

wycx 11y ago

How about giving people money, and if they are a heroin addict, let them have access to free heroin as well. I would imagine that a stable supply of the substance to which one is addicted, plus money off which to live, would form an excellent foundation for being a non-destructive member of society.

mnre4kgnk4eg 11y ago
A case could certainly be made for providing easier, socially-accepted access to such substances, on individual humanitarian grounds, but also on the grounds that the current proprietors are majorly-violent criminals who are already at the extremes (who, rather than die/"go home", said "fuck it" and "went big"). The way things are, substantial capital is already flowing to murderers and other violent or tangibly-wrong actors. I think it's reasonable to expect non-profit distribution would cut into that, which sounds appealing.

vixen99 11y ago

Just who is 'moralizing','smug and preachy' here? 'People want to moralize rather than enable'. Gosh! That's the debate over isn't it? Don't review current and awaited evidence just 'enable'. Purely anecdotal but please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities (and a big thank you to whoever is continuing them for my sake). Fortunately I'm an odd-ball and no one else anywhere would even think to behave as I would. So, my story is not only anecdotal but completely irrelevant.

mnre4kgnk4eg 11y ago
> please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities Interestingly, I keep reading HN and sometimes pause to make a new account with 0 karma, in order to contribute (hopefully) compelling comments and conversation when I am so inspired to, despite the karma/profit-motive. I actually think the presence of karma encourages me to be argumentative and act out indulgently, self-destructively, and even anti-socially, in the same way I see people in poverty do.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
> Purely anecdotal but please <enable me> and I'll quit economic activity to devote myself to life-improving activities (and a big thank you to whoever is continuing them for my sake). Fortunately I'm an odd-ball and no one else anywhere would even think to behave as I would. So, my story is not only anecdotal but completely irrelevant. You'll get bored shitless after a week of doing nothing with your life improvements to make a point, and suddenly you'll be back here having a productive input in the society, be it arts or engineering, services or thinking. But maybe you do really want to make a point and decide to just drink and be merry. That would still be a significant improvement for the society over having you perform "economic activity" in advertising or other bullshit industry we keep because we're too big on puritan values to even consider that slaving away your life for food and shelter isn't the optimal way of living.