5 ms·

> I find the excitement for UBI concerning. People seem to have already tossed up their hands and said, "well, I'll be useless in the future, I guess I can't wo

> I find the excitement for UBI concerning. People seem to have already tossed up their hands and said, "well, I'll be useless in the future, I guess I can't work now!". I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up. I see it as a form of liberation. Although I doubt society is ready to take such a mental/psychological leap, work/labor does not have to be the primary way in which one derives a sense of self-worth and purpose. I once worked in a mind-numbing, soul-crushing job (it was in the sub-prime credit market, basically screwing people over who didn't understand the concept of compounded interest rates) just to make ends meet. If I had UBI and didn't have to worry about whether I'd have somewhere to sleep, I would've volunteered working at the local hospital (I ended up quitting and doing this anyway, but only after another 6 months of working)

unityByFreedom 10y ago
> I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up To clarify, the excitement comes from knowledge workers who think they have something in mind that will satisfy displaced laborers. I don't think most laborers would be excited about not working for a lifetime and relying on government payments. I think they'd be concerned about getting scammed at some point down the road. > work/labor does not have to be the primary way in which one derives a sense of self-worth and purpose It doesn't for everyone, but it is for some people. UBI is a one-size-fits-all that would replace individually tailored programs. I don't think "work" is so terrible. Money is just a paper form of trust. You did some work for me, and I know you did that, so I convert your contribution to society into special paper that you can exchange elsewhere for stuff. A small community wouldn't need money. They'd all know each other. In a larger society, where we each have a specific role, it's one way to ensure people are pulling their weight. Work connects us, and money smooths the path. We're all working together on something. Some people need more than just money to keep going, so, I don't feel UBI is the right solution. My 2c.
- FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
  > Money is just a paper form of trust. Although it's impossible to know with 100% accuracy, a lot of historians believe that the origins of money tied up in the creation of empire and slavery. As you say, smaller societies didn't need money and worked on favors. As armies began being created, soldiers wanted something concrete up front, because they could die before you repaid the favor. So they settled on precious metals and eventually coins. Someone has to mine for these metals and mining is backbreaking work. The solution was to take conquered people and turn them into slaves. This is the vicious cycle of empire...armies need to get paid, so you need to plunder and conquer people, you have more territory which requires more soldiers which requires more coins which requires more slaves and on and on.
  - unityByFreedom 10y ago
    Money enables you to exchange goods without worrying about having the exact thing your neighbor is looking for. Shiny rare metals were money for awhile, and I guess the thing that people tended to value most, gold etc., ended up representing the universal trading platform. Arguing that the creation of money was tied to the creation of armies sounds like a political view that someone might push alongside the promise of peace on earth. Yet, animals fight over food. If humans didn't have money, we'd fight over that or something else that maintains our health and well being.
    - FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
      > Arguing that the creation of money was tied to the creation of armies sounds like a political view that someone might push alongside the promise of peace on earth. I wasn't penning some Marxist screed or making a value judgment about the nature of money. It's awesome because it means I don't have to farm the food that i eat. I specifically stated where that statement came from. You may try to call it political, but coin money was tied to the raising of armies. Before that, people just relied on an elaborate credit system. Coins originally were not used as a medium of exchange, they were just a way to represent quantity. > Yet, animals fight over food. If humans didn't have money, we'd fight over that or something else that maintains our health and well being. Eh, history and anthropology are murky on this subject. Personally, I think we focus too much on the role of competition in history and discount the role of cooperation.
      - unityByFreedom 10y ago
        > Personally, I think we focus too much on the role of competition in history and discount the role of cooperation Okay, well, you're the one who believes money was created to pay armies. I'd argue that the notion of exchange of some goods for different goods precedes that and has a lot more to do with cooperation. A promissory note is just a natural evolution of exchanging goods. It's my signature saying, yes I owe you x bananas because you gave me y tomatoes. Doesn't matter if it comes from a state or individual. Same concept.

unityByFreedom 10y ago

> I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up To clarify, the excitement comes from knowledge workers who think they have something in mind that will satisfy displaced laborers. I don't think most laborers would be excited about not working for a lifetime and relying on government payments. I think they'd be concerned about getting scammed at some point down the road. > work/labor does not have to be the primary way in which one derives a sense of self-worth and purpose It doesn't for everyone, but it is for some people. UBI is a one-size-fits-all that would replace individually tailored programs. I don't think "work" is so terrible. Money is just a paper form of trust. You did some work for me, and I know you did that, so I convert your contribution to society into special paper that you can exchange elsewhere for stuff. A small community wouldn't need money. They'd all know each other. In a larger society, where we each have a specific role, it's one way to ensure people are pulling their weight. Work connects us, and money smooths the path. We're all working together on something. Some people need more than just money to keep going, so, I don't feel UBI is the right solution. My 2c.

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
> Money is just a paper form of trust. Although it's impossible to know with 100% accuracy, a lot of historians believe that the origins of money tied up in the creation of empire and slavery. As you say, smaller societies didn't need money and worked on favors. As armies began being created, soldiers wanted something concrete up front, because they could die before you repaid the favor. So they settled on precious metals and eventually coins. Someone has to mine for these metals and mining is backbreaking work. The solution was to take conquered people and turn them into slaves. This is the vicious cycle of empire...armies need to get paid, so you need to plunder and conquer people, you have more territory which requires more soldiers which requires more coins which requires more slaves and on and on.
- unityByFreedom 10y ago
  Money enables you to exchange goods without worrying about having the exact thing your neighbor is looking for. Shiny rare metals were money for awhile, and I guess the thing that people tended to value most, gold etc., ended up representing the universal trading platform. Arguing that the creation of money was tied to the creation of armies sounds like a political view that someone might push alongside the promise of peace on earth. Yet, animals fight over food. If humans didn't have money, we'd fight over that or something else that maintains our health and well being.
  - FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
    > Arguing that the creation of money was tied to the creation of armies sounds like a political view that someone might push alongside the promise of peace on earth. I wasn't penning some Marxist screed or making a value judgment about the nature of money. It's awesome because it means I don't have to farm the food that i eat. I specifically stated where that statement came from. You may try to call it political, but coin money was tied to the raising of armies. Before that, people just relied on an elaborate credit system. Coins originally were not used as a medium of exchange, they were just a way to represent quantity. > Yet, animals fight over food. If humans didn't have money, we'd fight over that or something else that maintains our health and well being. Eh, history and anthropology are murky on this subject. Personally, I think we focus too much on the role of competition in history and discount the role of cooperation.
    - unityByFreedom 10y ago
      > Personally, I think we focus too much on the role of competition in history and discount the role of cooperation Okay, well, you're the one who believes money was created to pay armies. I'd argue that the notion of exchange of some goods for different goods precedes that and has a lot more to do with cooperation. A promissory note is just a natural evolution of exchanging goods. It's my signature saying, yes I owe you x bananas because you gave me y tomatoes. Doesn't matter if it comes from a state or individual. Same concept.