3 ms·
Having the UBI conversation in the context of the US is frivolous. The US has no populist or labor presence. We'd need 5-10 years of building that presence befo
by debacle 9y ago
Having the UBI conversation in the context of the US is frivolous. The US has no populist or labor presence. We'd need 5-10 years of building that presence before we could even begin to talk UBI, and even then there'd be a lot of obstruction.
- alphonsegaston 9y agoI think the idea behind contemporary UBI discussions is to prevent exactly that kind of populism from congealing. The plan has to be something like introduce UBI as a short term panacea while the wealthy further consolidate their power. Once the stranglehold is in place, take it apart in all the same ways Americans have destroyed their safety nets in the past (means testing, welfare to work, etc). Exactly what they did with healthcare “reform”/Obamacare.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Having the UBI conversation in the context of the US is frivolous. The US has no populist or labor presence. We'd need 5-10 years of building that presence before we could even begin to talk UBI, and even then there'd be a lot of obstruction. (1) You are strategically wrong, in that having policy goals (e.g., UBI) and talking about them front and center has always been instrumental in building labor/populist movements. (2) You are factually wrong about the current context, in that the US has substantially and political relevant populist factions (both the energization of the one on the right and the alienation of the one on the left were key factors in the 2016 election.)
- s73ver_ 9y agoThere may be populist factions on both sides, but the one on the left is not very powerful, and the one on the right gave rise to Trumpism, which very clearly would not be in favor of this at all.