8 ms·

The shift in attitude needs to be that slackers are being paid to stay out of the way of people that want to work and that's a good thing

by glibgil 10y ago

twblalock 10y ago
> The shift in attitude needs to be that slackers are being paid to stay out of the way of people that want to work and that's a good thing The people who work, who I assume are the intended audience of your argument, will also be aware that their income taxes are going directly into the pockets of the slackers. The perception that hardworking peoples' income tax goes to people who do not deserve it is at the root of much of the opposition to welfare programs today. It's such a strong sentiment that it makes it difficult to get political support for even the rudimentary safety net we have now -- it would be an even more potent political argument against UBI.
- thaumaturgy 10y ago
  I can't tell if this is an argument you are making, or just an argument you're saying exists, but there are several problems with it. First, "hardworking peoples' income tax" already goes to people who, in their view, don't deserve it. Not just in the form of welfare and social programs that already exist, but also in the form of massive business in the defense industry or in the environmental industry, depending on where your political views lie. Second, I'm far, far less concerned with who gets my tax money -- or even, to some extent, how much I have to pay for taxes -- than I am with my own financial future. If someone wants to propose a program which would make my taxes go up but also substantially increase my supply of potential customers ... that sounds like a pretty good deal to me.
  - twblalock 10y ago
    > First, "hardworking peoples' income tax" already goes to people who, in their view, don't deserve it. Not just in the form of welfare and social programs that already exist, but also in the form of massive business in the defense industry or in the environmental industry, depending on where your political views lie. Telling people that things are already bad is not going to convince them to support policies that will make things even worse. > Second, I'm far, far less concerned with who gets my tax money -- or even, to some extent, how much I have to pay for taxes -- than I am with my own financial future. If someone wants to propose a program which would make my taxes go up but also substantially increase my supply of potential customers ... that sounds like a pretty good deal to me. Good for you. If the majority of voters thought that way, we would already have a much better welfare system than we actually do. So, they must not think that way, and there is no reason to believe they will make an exception for basic income.
    - thaumaturgy 10y ago
      It's starting to sound more like this is your argument, rather than one you're charitably reminding us all of. > Telling people that things are already bad is not going to convince them to support policies that will make things even worse. Well, that's one way to describe that point, I suppose. About the wrongest way, but one way. Another way is: "this is a proposal which is not very different from what we already do, but might have a much better outcome." Unfortunately, that's not a debate we can probably have, since we're having trouble agreeing on the meaning of English words. > If the majority of voters thought that way, we would already have a much better welfare system than we actually do. So, they must not think that way, and there is no reason to believe they will make an exception for basic income. Ah, the "ignorance is permanent" position. Sorry, I've got too many years of experience in arguments on the internet to want to spend any time on that. If it isn't already clear to you that people's minds can be changed for better (or for worse) when presented with either evidence or convincing arguments, then I'm not sure which reality you're living in but it's not the same one I am.
- lambertsimnel 10y ago
  Hardworking people would be free to leave paid employment and live on basic income themselves, rather than subsidise the unemployed. I think the hope is that work would become more pleasant as basic income lifts workers' bargaining power and that most people would choose to add to their basic income through paid employment.
  - lambertsimnel 10y ago
    Why the downvote?
- ryandrake 10y ago
  This is why UBI will never be implemented in the USA. The culture's deep-seated puritanical belief that one's worth comes entirely from their productive work-output--that a living must be "earned" and "deserved" in order to be legitimate.
- hx87 10y ago
  As a taxpayer I'd rather pay people to stay happy than pay police to beat them down when they get uppity.

The shift in attitude needs to be that slackers are being paid to stay out of the way of people that want to work and that's a good thing

by glibgil 10y ago

The shift in attitude needs to be that slackers are being paid to stay out of the way of people that want to work and that's a good thing

twblalock 10y ago

> The shift in attitude needs to be that slackers are being paid to stay out of the way of people that want to work and that's a good thing The people who work, who I assume are the intended audience of your argument, will also be aware that their income taxes are going directly into the pockets of the slackers. The perception that hardworking peoples' income tax goes to people who do not deserve it is at the root of much of the opposition to welfare programs today. It's such a strong sentiment that it makes it difficult to get political support for even the rudimentary safety net we have now -- it would be an even more potent political argument against UBI.

thaumaturgy 10y ago
I can't tell if this is an argument you are making, or just an argument you're saying exists, but there are several problems with it. First, "hardworking peoples' income tax" already goes to people who, in their view, don't deserve it. Not just in the form of welfare and social programs that already exist, but also in the form of massive business in the defense industry or in the environmental industry, depending on where your political views lie. Second, I'm far, far less concerned with who gets my tax money -- or even, to some extent, how much I have to pay for taxes -- than I am with my own financial future. If someone wants to propose a program which would make my taxes go up but also substantially increase my supply of potential customers ... that sounds like a pretty good deal to me.
- twblalock 10y ago
  > First, "hardworking peoples' income tax" already goes to people who, in their view, don't deserve it. Not just in the form of welfare and social programs that already exist, but also in the form of massive business in the defense industry or in the environmental industry, depending on where your political views lie. Telling people that things are already bad is not going to convince them to support policies that will make things even worse. > Second, I'm far, far less concerned with who gets my tax money -- or even, to some extent, how much I have to pay for taxes -- than I am with my own financial future. If someone wants to propose a program which would make my taxes go up but also substantially increase my supply of potential customers ... that sounds like a pretty good deal to me. Good for you. If the majority of voters thought that way, we would already have a much better welfare system than we actually do. So, they must not think that way, and there is no reason to believe they will make an exception for basic income.
  - thaumaturgy 10y ago
    It's starting to sound more like this is your argument, rather than one you're charitably reminding us all of. > Telling people that things are already bad is not going to convince them to support policies that will make things even worse. Well, that's one way to describe that point, I suppose. About the wrongest way, but one way. Another way is: "this is a proposal which is not very different from what we already do, but might have a much better outcome." Unfortunately, that's not a debate we can probably have, since we're having trouble agreeing on the meaning of English words. > If the majority of voters thought that way, we would already have a much better welfare system than we actually do. So, they must not think that way, and there is no reason to believe they will make an exception for basic income. Ah, the "ignorance is permanent" position. Sorry, I've got too many years of experience in arguments on the internet to want to spend any time on that. If it isn't already clear to you that people's minds can be changed for better (or for worse) when presented with either evidence or convincing arguments, then I'm not sure which reality you're living in but it's not the same one I am.
lambertsimnel 10y ago
Hardworking people would be free to leave paid employment and live on basic income themselves, rather than subsidise the unemployed. I think the hope is that work would become more pleasant as basic income lifts workers' bargaining power and that most people would choose to add to their basic income through paid employment.
- lambertsimnel 10y ago
  Why the downvote?
ryandrake 10y ago
This is why UBI will never be implemented in the USA. The culture's deep-seated puritanical belief that one's worth comes entirely from their productive work-output--that a living must be "earned" and "deserved" in order to be legitimate.
hx87 10y ago
As a taxpayer I'd rather pay people to stay happy than pay police to beat them down when they get uppity.