5 ms·

As an employed person making 100k, if given UBI I would quit and not do anything productive-to-society for most of the rest of my life. So yes, that is a legiti

As an employed person making 100k, if given UBI I would quit and not do anything productive-to-society for most of the rest of my life. So yes, that is a legitimate argument. The counter-argument is that the benefit coming from more people pursuing entrepreneurial/risk-taking/passion-driven endeavors will OUTWEIGH the lazy fucks like me.

mises 8y ago
The problem is whole I'd like to think they would, I think people will gradually get lazier as they get used to it. Most people do the minimum required now; what makes everyone think they will keep that same level of productivity arbitrarily when it's not the minimum liveable?
- SolaceQuantum 8y ago
  I'd suggest looking at retirement- one of the important facets of retirement is the encouragement to continue contributing to society once retired because it is always necessary to be productive in some way or form for the human condition as we understand it. It is psychologically damaging to not be constantly doing stuff that is at least mildly fulfilling in some way. If a sizeable portion or even a majority of people recieved UBI we would quickly learn as a population what's always been advised to our elderly.
  - mises 8y ago
    How do you propose to do this? We have a lot of trouble doing it with old people already.
    - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
      Do we? I'm unaware of that, actually. I was under the impression it was widely known that retired people are the sizeable portion of those who volunteer for anything in particular, and there's the existing tropes of retired people getting into art and fitness, and community activities. Book clubs. Crochet/knitting clubs. Bingo. Dancing.
      - mises 8y ago
        A sizeable portion, maybe, but certainly not all (and probably not even most). Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do? Let alone pay them for?
        ams6110 8y ago
        Exactly. Those are time killing activities to keep from staring out the window and losing your mind. Which is also a big problem for the elderly and unemployed.
        moorhosj 8y ago
        Or, we could view them as “happiness activities”. In labor economics it is called leisure and the goal of people is to optimize between income and leisure. I know lots of employed people who spend their days “staring out the window losing their mind”. It seems we have over optimized in the wrong direction (towards work and away from leisure).
        mises 8y ago
        "Happiness activities" are fine, but I'm not sure they should be subsidized by taxes.
        moorhosj 8y ago
        They already are subsidized in plenty of places (sports stadiums and public parks for example). It raises a fundamental question about the government's role and it's goals. We tend focus on maximizing productivity and other countries focus more on maximizing health/happiness. Even the way Americans talk about education is through the lenses of creating more productive workers as opposed to something like creating more enriched citizens.
        SolaceQuantum 8y ago
        "Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do?" You also ignored my first and more explained upon example, volunteering. Is there a reason for that?
chrisco255 8y ago
You can't have a UBI without massive taxation. Massive taxation increases the risk of doing business. The higher the risks, the less entrepreneurship a country will see.
- swiley 8y ago
  The argument is that there’s less personal risk sine a failed business won’t result in the founders becoming homeless.
  - mises 8y ago
    But there's a lot more risk for the investors, and there's a lot less money for companies to buy their products.
    - swiley 8y ago
      Oh dear, the poor investors, That's a catastrophe right there.
- perfunctory 8y ago
  > Massive taxation increases the risk of doing business I encourage you to make a list of countries ordered by taxation level, and another one ordered by the risk of doing business. And then compare the two.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    I'd phrase it as "massive taxation reduces the reward of doing business" and therefore, assuming equivalent risk, some number of potential entrepreneurs (and their investors) will decide it's not worth it.
  - chrisco255 8y ago
    If you're thinking that it's instructive to compare nations by tax rates in isolation, as if it's an "all things being equal" comparison I would challenge that on many levels.
SolaceQuantum 8y ago
I'm assuming you'd also downgrade your lifestyle from a 100k/yr to the median individual income or less? (Not being snarky, genuinely curious as to your thought process regarding quitting 100k/yr income because you can survive off 25-30k/yr or something)
- lr4444lr 8y ago
  After taxes on the 100K plus the costs of commuting and childcare, that difference might not even be so stark.
  - leetcrew 8y ago
    depends what kind of UBI we are considering. if you get $10k each for you, your wife (assuming you are married), and each child, you might be somewhere close to breaking even after taxes and the expenses you mentioned. if only you and your wife get the $10k, you're looking at a pretty tight budget. imo, only the latter setup is reasonable. I'm all for giving individuals the freedom to float around for a while figuring out what the want to do, or even subsist for their whole lives if they don't "click" with any work that's valuable to the market. but I don't think it's fair to make the taxpayers support however many children you decide to have.
perfunctory 8y ago
I am employed and making more than 100K and still I am not doing anything productive for society. So even if I quit given UBI and become "unproductive" it will have no meaningful impact on anything.
- ams6110 8y ago
  You're presumably doing something productive for somebody who's willing to pay you $100K for it. Or do you work for the government?
  - perfunctory 8y ago
    It's complicated but in general if somebody is willing (or has to) to pay you it's not per se productive. In a society where everyone's basic needs are guaranteed to be covered we both would have made different choices.
r3bl 8y ago
Usually the goal of UBI is to lift everyone above the poverty line, not to make everyone's lives comfortable. If you're happy living as a lazy fuck just shy of poverty, you're welcome to do so. If you want some comfort, security, and the ability to not anticipate each 1st of the month, you'd probably still want to work. I personally think that UBI is a requirement for us to be able to say that we each have a fair shot at success. Nobody should worry about having a roof over their head or providing food on the table. We have plenty of both for each human in the world already.
glitchc 8y ago
Let’s not rail on someone simply because they provided a counter-example to disprove the original assertion that everyone on UBI would do something productive with their time. Given that he is strictly providing a personal anecdote on what he would do with the money and extra time, the responses suggest that some people are quite judgemental about how other people spend their own money.
kingkawn 8y ago
The gift of ubi is society saying, “we are here to help you without compelling you to contribute in any specific way. But if you don’t contribute in some way, we may lose the ability to help people. here and now is your chance to choose for yourself how to keep the world afloat and vibrant. You have our support. We are looking forward to seeing how you choose to support the world in turn.”
- ams6110 8y ago
  Honestly I think about 5% of people will be motivated by that sentiment.
  - kingkawn 8y ago
    Probably more than the number of people who feel deeply motivated under the current setup.
- 0-_-0 8y ago
  I believe the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" approach has already been tried many times over the world in the 20th century and failed every single time. As E. O. Wilson (a world leading expert in studying ants) said about communism/socialism: “Great Idea. Wrong Species.”
  - kingkawn 8y ago
    Those systems viciously enforced a centralized vision of what each person should do. This is not that, this is true autonomy.

mises 8y ago

The problem is whole I'd like to think they would, I think people will gradually get lazier as they get used to it. Most people do the minimum required now; what makes everyone think they will keep that same level of productivity arbitrarily when it's not the minimum liveable?

SolaceQuantum 8y ago
I'd suggest looking at retirement- one of the important facets of retirement is the encouragement to continue contributing to society once retired because it is always necessary to be productive in some way or form for the human condition as we understand it. It is psychologically damaging to not be constantly doing stuff that is at least mildly fulfilling in some way. If a sizeable portion or even a majority of people recieved UBI we would quickly learn as a population what's always been advised to our elderly.
- mises 8y ago
  How do you propose to do this? We have a lot of trouble doing it with old people already.
  - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
    Do we? I'm unaware of that, actually. I was under the impression it was widely known that retired people are the sizeable portion of those who volunteer for anything in particular, and there's the existing tropes of retired people getting into art and fitness, and community activities. Book clubs. Crochet/knitting clubs. Bingo. Dancing.
    - mises 8y ago
      A sizeable portion, maybe, but certainly not all (and probably not even most). Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do? Let alone pay them for?
      - ams6110 8y ago
        Exactly. Those are time killing activities to keep from staring out the window and losing your mind. Which is also a big problem for the elderly and unemployed.
        moorhosj 8y ago
        Or, we could view them as “happiness activities”. In labor economics it is called leisure and the goal of people is to optimize between income and leisure. I know lots of employed people who spend their days “staring out the window losing their mind”. It seems we have over optimized in the wrong direction (towards work and away from leisure).
        mises 8y ago
        "Happiness activities" are fine, but I'm not sure they should be subsidized by taxes.
        moorhosj 8y ago
        They already are subsidized in plenty of places (sports stadiums and public parks for example). It raises a fundamental question about the government's role and it's goals. We tend focus on maximizing productivity and other countries focus more on maximizing health/happiness. Even the way Americans talk about education is through the lenses of creating more productive workers as opposed to something like creating more enriched citizens.
      - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
        "Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do?" You also ignored my first and more explained upon example, volunteering. Is there a reason for that?

chrisco255 8y ago

You can't have a UBI without massive taxation. Massive taxation increases the risk of doing business. The higher the risks, the less entrepreneurship a country will see.

swiley 8y ago
The argument is that there’s less personal risk sine a failed business won’t result in the founders becoming homeless.
- mises 8y ago
  But there's a lot more risk for the investors, and there's a lot less money for companies to buy their products.
  - swiley 8y ago
    Oh dear, the poor investors, That's a catastrophe right there.
perfunctory 8y ago
> Massive taxation increases the risk of doing business I encourage you to make a list of countries ordered by taxation level, and another one ordered by the risk of doing business. And then compare the two.
- ams6110 8y ago
  I'd phrase it as "massive taxation reduces the reward of doing business" and therefore, assuming equivalent risk, some number of potential entrepreneurs (and their investors) will decide it's not worth it.
- chrisco255 8y ago
  If you're thinking that it's instructive to compare nations by tax rates in isolation, as if it's an "all things being equal" comparison I would challenge that on many levels.

SolaceQuantum 8y ago

I'm assuming you'd also downgrade your lifestyle from a 100k/yr to the median individual income or less? (Not being snarky, genuinely curious as to your thought process regarding quitting 100k/yr income because you can survive off 25-30k/yr or something)

lr4444lr 8y ago
After taxes on the 100K plus the costs of commuting and childcare, that difference might not even be so stark.
- leetcrew 8y ago
  depends what kind of UBI we are considering. if you get $10k each for you, your wife (assuming you are married), and each child, you might be somewhere close to breaking even after taxes and the expenses you mentioned. if only you and your wife get the $10k, you're looking at a pretty tight budget. imo, only the latter setup is reasonable. I'm all for giving individuals the freedom to float around for a while figuring out what the want to do, or even subsist for their whole lives if they don't "click" with any work that's valuable to the market. but I don't think it's fair to make the taxpayers support however many children you decide to have.

perfunctory 8y ago

I am employed and making more than 100K and still I am not doing anything productive for society. So even if I quit given UBI and become "unproductive" it will have no meaningful impact on anything.

ams6110 8y ago
You're presumably doing something productive for somebody who's willing to pay you $100K for it. Or do you work for the government?
- perfunctory 8y ago
  It's complicated but in general if somebody is willing (or has to) to pay you it's not per se productive. In a society where everyone's basic needs are guaranteed to be covered we both would have made different choices.

r3bl 8y ago

Usually the goal of UBI is to lift everyone above the poverty line, not to make everyone's lives comfortable. If you're happy living as a lazy fuck just shy of poverty, you're welcome to do so. If you want some comfort, security, and the ability to not anticipate each 1st of the month, you'd probably still want to work. I personally think that UBI is a requirement for us to be able to say that we each have a fair shot at success. Nobody should worry about having a roof over their head or providing food on the table. We have plenty of both for each human in the world already.

glitchc 8y ago

Let’s not rail on someone simply because they provided a counter-example to disprove the original assertion that everyone on UBI would do something productive with their time. Given that he is strictly providing a personal anecdote on what he would do with the money and extra time, the responses suggest that some people are quite judgemental about how other people spend their own money.

kingkawn 8y ago

The gift of ubi is society saying, “we are here to help you without compelling you to contribute in any specific way. But if you don’t contribute in some way, we may lose the ability to help people. here and now is your chance to choose for yourself how to keep the world afloat and vibrant. You have our support. We are looking forward to seeing how you choose to support the world in turn.”

ams6110 8y ago
Honestly I think about 5% of people will be motivated by that sentiment.
- kingkawn 8y ago
  Probably more than the number of people who feel deeply motivated under the current setup.
0-_-0 8y ago
I believe the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" approach has already been tried many times over the world in the 20th century and failed every single time. As E. O. Wilson (a world leading expert in studying ants) said about communism/socialism: “Great Idea. Wrong Species.”
- kingkawn 8y ago
  Those systems viciously enforced a centralized vision of what each person should do. This is not that, this is true autonomy.