3 ms·

There's an argument made by some psychologists that human satisfaction from earning a wage rather confers irreplaceable benefits and would result in better outc

There's an argument made by some psychologists that human satisfaction from earning a wage rather confers irreplaceable benefits and would result in better outcomes of self-sufficiency over living on handouts at an even higher monetary value. I'm not saying your point isn't valid, or that I even disagree with it, but the article does raise this issue, and claims there is data to back it up.

wolfram74 9y ago
Then maybe we should raise the estate tax to 100% to make sure everybody get's these irreplaceable benefits regardless of who their parents are. We're depriving those poor Walden's knowledge of an honest days work.
- geezerjay 9y ago
  Why do you want to steel all the possessions of any dying man? More importantly, why do you believe such petty policies benefit society?
philipkglass 9y ago
I've often seen that argument in articles about UBI, but the supporting examples are usually unconvincing. If "people suffer from lack of work, not lack of money," why are the examples offered e.g. communities full of impoverished people subsisting on disability, not luxury retirement communities? Surely the residents of the latter are deprived of weeding a field all day with hand tools, too. If not-having a boss directing you to perform tasks is what's ailing the unemployed, and money is secondary, then Jim Moneybags should be roughly as bad off as Joe Welfare, so long as neither Jim nor Joe go to work each weekday.
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  If I were to play devil's advocate, I'd say that the retirees as a sub-community can be found anywhere not working. They're old, and they are enjoying their senescence basking in their life accomplishments and family. Also, those retirement communities are supported by a network of health care and leisure industry workers, which are paid for out of value the old people saved from their productive activity during their working years.
- snowwrestler 9y ago
  I don't think it's true that "people suffer from lack of work, not lack of money." I do think it's true that "people suffer from lack of work AND lack of money." That is, if you just give people enough money to survive, and nothing to do, they still suffer. It's not really valid to compare the experiences of old retired people and working age people (or younger). Age is a major complicating factor. And, at least in the U.S., we already give money to old people; it's called Social Security and Medicare. The question is, what do we do with 22 year olds who can't find work? What will the rest of their life be like if they go on the equivalent of Social Security and Medicare at 22? Anecdotally I think we all have a sense of the potential for problems when young people are too idle.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

wolfram74 9y ago

Then maybe we should raise the estate tax to 100% to make sure everybody get's these irreplaceable benefits regardless of who their parents are. We're depriving those poor Walden's knowledge of an honest days work.

geezerjay 9y ago
Why do you want to steel all the possessions of any dying man? More importantly, why do you believe such petty policies benefit society?

philipkglass 9y ago

I've often seen that argument in articles about UBI, but the supporting examples are usually unconvincing. If "people suffer from lack of work, not lack of money," why are the examples offered e.g. communities full of impoverished people subsisting on disability, not luxury retirement communities? Surely the residents of the latter are deprived of weeding a field all day with hand tools, too. If not-having a boss directing you to perform tasks is what's ailing the unemployed, and money is secondary, then Jim Moneybags should be roughly as bad off as Joe Welfare, so long as neither Jim nor Joe go to work each weekday.

lr4444lr 9y ago
If I were to play devil's advocate, I'd say that the retirees as a sub-community can be found anywhere not working. They're old, and they are enjoying their senescence basking in their life accomplishments and family. Also, those retirement communities are supported by a network of health care and leisure industry workers, which are paid for out of value the old people saved from their productive activity during their working years.
snowwrestler 9y ago
I don't think it's true that "people suffer from lack of work, not lack of money." I do think it's true that "people suffer from lack of work AND lack of money." That is, if you just give people enough money to survive, and nothing to do, they still suffer. It's not really valid to compare the experiences of old retired people and working age people (or younger). Age is a major complicating factor. And, at least in the U.S., we already give money to old people; it's called Social Security and Medicare. The question is, what do we do with 22 year olds who can't find work? What will the rest of their life be like if they go on the equivalent of Social Security and Medicare at 22? Anecdotally I think we all have a sense of the potential for problems when young people are too idle.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]