3 ms·

To me, part of the problem is that nobody can simply "live" anymore. While there are homesteaders who can effectively "live off the land", people can no longer

To me, part of the problem is that nobody can simply "live" anymore. While there are homesteaders who can effectively "live off the land", people can no longer actually do that. Instead of UBI, why not create a system where people can actually "live" without needing to create a whole system where the government ends up requiring people to pay into the system? From the video: "We can't just give these people houses because they don't have jobs". Yeah, because they don't just get "the house" they also have to pay property taxes, and for the utilities, and for everything else that is required, you know, actually live in the house. Maybe this is overly simplistic, but it seems like you can do one of two things: prop "the system" up by continuing to require things like property taxes and the like, or find a way for people to be able to actually, you know, OWN their property and do whatever they want with it so that they could be completely self-sufficient. EDIT: Actually, that seems to be something along the lines of what he is saying: "UBI perputates people as consumers but not as owners" (my paraphrase)

petermcneeley 8y ago
Very few people would want to live this "self-sufficient" lifestyle. I dont think people are opposed to efficiencies of scale or the advancements that can come from multinational corporations. I think that its not just simplistic reasoning is completely wrongheaded.
- WalterSear 8y ago
  Even fewer comprehend the difficulties and sacrifice it would entail.
simonh 8y ago
I'm not a fan of UBI, but income is a valuable and liberating thing. It gives people choice by providing them with a resource they control and can spend as they want. Living in the modern works necessarily involves the consumption of valuable resources. Space, power, water, food, goods, services. Providing those at no costs will lead to horrible inefficiencies and excessive use. You need to charge for them so that people can make rational choices and trade-offs between them and take responsibility for their decisions and preferences.

petermcneeley 8y ago

Very few people would want to live this "self-sufficient" lifestyle. I dont think people are opposed to efficiencies of scale or the advancements that can come from multinational corporations. I think that its not just simplistic reasoning is completely wrongheaded.

WalterSear 8y ago
Even fewer comprehend the difficulties and sacrifice it would entail.

simonh 8y ago

I'm not a fan of UBI, but income is a valuable and liberating thing. It gives people choice by providing them with a resource they control and can spend as they want. Living in the modern works necessarily involves the consumption of valuable resources. Space, power, water, food, goods, services. Providing those at no costs will lead to horrible inefficiencies and excessive use. You need to charge for them so that people can make rational choices and trade-offs between them and take responsibility for their decisions and preferences.