5 ms·

Of course, people have different needs. My point was it's possible one wouldn't be able to maintain one's current standard of living if out of job and living on

Of course, people have different needs. My point was it's possible one wouldn't be able to maintain one's current standard of living if out of job and living on this future UBI. Then people would want to work to regain at least their previous standard of living.

krapp 8y ago
>My point was it's possible one wouldn't be able to maintain one's current standard of living if out of job and living on this future UBI. The purpose of UBI as I understand it would be to provide a stable floor of income for people independent of employment. I think of it as being like a minimum wage - not high enough for a middle class standard of living, but hopefully higher than the poverty line. Enough to keep food on the table.
- dmortin 8y ago
  If it will be like minimum wage then many people are mistaken thinking that they will be able live on UBI in the future and maintain their current lifestyles (big house, two cars, etc.).
  - krapp 8y ago
    Anyone who believes UBI will allow them to maintain that quality of life fundamentally misunderstands its purpose and possible scope. UBI just decouples employment from social welfare, people who want a big house and two cars would still have to work for it.
lovich 8y ago
Yes, if UBI wasn't UBI then of course it wouldn't be UBI. The very definition of it, is that it provides a floor for people where a standard of living _is_ maintained. There are arguments that UBI is not attainable/sustainable, but that's different then getting the definition wrong
- dmortin 8y ago
  But what is that standard? If today someboday has a big house and two cars, and robots take his job in the future then can he expect his UBI will be enough to maintain the big house and 2 cars, because that is his current standard of living? I doubt that.
  - lovich 8y ago
    The standard shouldnt be "This guys personal idea of a living situation". Wed have to come to an agreement as a society as to what is part of that standard. I think shelter, clothes, internet, and food would be a reasonable modern standard but that shelter doesn't have to mean a 3000 sq ft house, and internet doesn't mean they have the fastest connection speed possible in the area, and food doesn't mean steak and lobster every night. That standard should increase as technology improves, for instance if we did this in the 90s having internet access would have been a luxury and not a requirement for being part of society, but it doesn't have to be something luxurious compared to the time period its paid out in

krapp 8y ago

>My point was it's possible one wouldn't be able to maintain one's current standard of living if out of job and living on this future UBI. The purpose of UBI as I understand it would be to provide a stable floor of income for people independent of employment. I think of it as being like a minimum wage - not high enough for a middle class standard of living, but hopefully higher than the poverty line. Enough to keep food on the table.

dmortin 8y ago
If it will be like minimum wage then many people are mistaken thinking that they will be able live on UBI in the future and maintain their current lifestyles (big house, two cars, etc.).
- krapp 8y ago
  Anyone who believes UBI will allow them to maintain that quality of life fundamentally misunderstands its purpose and possible scope. UBI just decouples employment from social welfare, people who want a big house and two cars would still have to work for it.

lovich 8y ago

Yes, if UBI wasn't UBI then of course it wouldn't be UBI. The very definition of it, is that it provides a floor for people where a standard of living _is_ maintained. There are arguments that UBI is not attainable/sustainable, but that's different then getting the definition wrong

dmortin 8y ago
But what is that standard? If today someboday has a big house and two cars, and robots take his job in the future then can he expect his UBI will be enough to maintain the big house and 2 cars, because that is his current standard of living? I doubt that.
- lovich 8y ago
  The standard shouldnt be "This guys personal idea of a living situation". Wed have to come to an agreement as a society as to what is part of that standard. I think shelter, clothes, internet, and food would be a reasonable modern standard but that shelter doesn't have to mean a 3000 sq ft house, and internet doesn't mean they have the fastest connection speed possible in the area, and food doesn't mean steak and lobster every night. That standard should increase as technology improves, for instance if we did this in the 90s having internet access would have been a luxury and not a requirement for being part of society, but it doesn't have to be something luxurious compared to the time period its paid out in