7 ms·

I think its fuzzy -- and perhaps because its so different, or perhaps because (as you suggest) it may not be realistic. But were it realistic, I'd assume hobbie

I think its fuzzy -- and perhaps because its so different, or perhaps because (as you suggest) it may not be realistic. But were it realistic, I'd assume hobbies would be a big part of a well functioning society. I think we'd see at least some blossoming of hobbyists where, free to pursue their highest interests, you'd see some truly spectacular music and art, some people becoming nearly professional at their sport of choice (and more esports). I think there's at least one (and perhaps many) hobbies for everyone, and that many people working and parenting never get around to discovering them. Having only more recently discovered mine, I can tell you I wish i had more time to pursue them!

smallnamespace 10y ago
There's another problem with basic income: being able to earn an income is a signal of mate quality, and that norm might take a long time to unlearn. While it's better than letting people starve or get food stamps, you might find a large class of young, unemployed males who have trouble getting interest from potential mates. Historically, that's always been recipe for political unrest. And even if there's not, if basic income becomes a thing, I'll bet there is large positive status attached to someone demanding your labor. People on basic will be second-class citizens, and there will always be political pressure from the 'working class' to reduce the drain on the tax base.
- justin 10y ago
  We already have large classes of "second class citizens" -- might as well make life more livable for them.
- eddy_chan 10y ago
  The whole point of basic income is that it enables such young males to devote their time to pursuing non-monetary goals in music, arts which would signal 'mate quality'. Or longer term monetary goals such as autodidactically acquiring a skill e.g programming and building something. Poor people in the traditional sense would be able to pursue internships without pay to gain skills because they are underpinned by UB. An option not available today. As an employer I could take on more 'apprentices' on UBI, the contract being that I give them training, give them guidance whilst they work 'for free' until a certain point it becomes worthwhile to pay them above and beyond UBI because they're worth it.
- shagie 10y ago
  This is known as "bare branches" http://www.ejhs.org/volume15/Bare.html http://www.ejhs.org/volume15/Bare.html
  - zhemao 10y ago
    Well that's a rather euphemistic translation of guan gun. I've always thought of it as "bare stick" or "bare pole". The phallic connotations being 100% intentional.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- zhemao 10y ago
  That would happen anyway. Better that they have their basic needs met but have trouble finding a mate than they have to struggle to survive and have trouble finding a mate.
- Retra 10y ago
  Did you hear the news? Women have sex drive. Half the men on this planet could be drooling on themselves and they'd still get laid. >Historically, that's always been recipe for political unrest. Historically, unemployed men have no income whatsoever. That's the recipe for political unrest. Not men who "can't compete" for mates, however you imagine that could happen.
  - Bakary 10y ago
    That doesn't really correspond to the reality of sexual behavior though. The mere presence of a partner and of a sex drive doesn't mean sex will be a desired outcome, since the traits of the partner in question are the determining factor. Historically, a huge proportion of men have never reproduced and genetic markers imply a strong occurrence of polygyny (it is in fact still widely practiced today) In societies where status is comparatively more important and there exists a surplus of males, this is even more visible. With basic income, selection would simply shift even more towards physical appearance and charisma than it does today.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Prize for the most un-classy comment of the month. Really, women are so desperate for sex that they have to have sex indiscriminately? I think you may want to re-think this part of your worldview, nymphomaniacs exist but they do not make up the vast majority of the women, at least, not in my experience.
    - JohnStrange 10y ago
      Not indiscriminately. In terms of sex, they go for the looks. Just like men. Regarding long-term partnership and raising children, that's a whole different story -- just like with men.
- douche 10y ago
  People that are on the equivalent of basic now are already second-class citizens. On the other hand, there are always alternative paths to attractiveness, outside of the purely financial. In some sub-cultures, you can be broke as hell, but if, say, you're really good at playing guitar, you can have your pick.

smallnamespace 10y ago

There's another problem with basic income: being able to earn an income is a signal of mate quality, and that norm might take a long time to unlearn. While it's better than letting people starve or get food stamps, you might find a large class of young, unemployed males who have trouble getting interest from potential mates. Historically, that's always been recipe for political unrest. And even if there's not, if basic income becomes a thing, I'll bet there is large positive status attached to someone demanding your labor. People on basic will be second-class citizens, and there will always be political pressure from the 'working class' to reduce the drain on the tax base.

justin 10y ago
We already have large classes of "second class citizens" -- might as well make life more livable for them.
eddy_chan 10y ago
The whole point of basic income is that it enables such young males to devote their time to pursuing non-monetary goals in music, arts which would signal 'mate quality'. Or longer term monetary goals such as autodidactically acquiring a skill e.g programming and building something. Poor people in the traditional sense would be able to pursue internships without pay to gain skills because they are underpinned by UB. An option not available today. As an employer I could take on more 'apprentices' on UBI, the contract being that I give them training, give them guidance whilst they work 'for free' until a certain point it becomes worthwhile to pay them above and beyond UBI because they're worth it.
shagie 10y ago
This is known as "bare branches" http://www.ejhs.org/volume15/Bare.html http://www.ejhs.org/volume15/Bare.html
- zhemao 10y ago
  Well that's a rather euphemistic translation of guan gun. I've always thought of it as "bare stick" or "bare pole". The phallic connotations being 100% intentional.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
zhemao 10y ago
That would happen anyway. Better that they have their basic needs met but have trouble finding a mate than they have to struggle to survive and have trouble finding a mate.
Retra 10y ago
Did you hear the news? Women have sex drive. Half the men on this planet could be drooling on themselves and they'd still get laid. >Historically, that's always been recipe for political unrest. Historically, unemployed men have no income whatsoever. That's the recipe for political unrest. Not men who "can't compete" for mates, however you imagine that could happen.
- Bakary 10y ago
  That doesn't really correspond to the reality of sexual behavior though. The mere presence of a partner and of a sex drive doesn't mean sex will be a desired outcome, since the traits of the partner in question are the determining factor. Historically, a huge proportion of men have never reproduced and genetic markers imply a strong occurrence of polygyny (it is in fact still widely practiced today) In societies where status is comparatively more important and there exists a surplus of males, this is even more visible. With basic income, selection would simply shift even more towards physical appearance and charisma than it does today.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Prize for the most un-classy comment of the month. Really, women are so desperate for sex that they have to have sex indiscriminately? I think you may want to re-think this part of your worldview, nymphomaniacs exist but they do not make up the vast majority of the women, at least, not in my experience.
  - JohnStrange 10y ago
    Not indiscriminately. In terms of sex, they go for the looks. Just like men. Regarding long-term partnership and raising children, that's a whole different story -- just like with men.
douche 10y ago
People that are on the equivalent of basic now are already second-class citizens. On the other hand, there are always alternative paths to attractiveness, outside of the purely financial. In some sub-cultures, you can be broke as hell, but if, say, you're really good at playing guitar, you can have your pick.