6 ms·

I can't be the only one who has noticed the huge influx of articles and comments for UBI in places like reddit and even HN, of late. It seems that the ongoing c

I can't be the only one who has noticed the huge influx of articles and comments for UBI in places like reddit and even HN, of late. It seems that the ongoing crisis is fuelling a lot of agendas.

symplee 6y ago
Come on, you know the routine. No matter what your cause is: Never let a crisis go to waste.
- searchableguy 6y ago
  Some of that make me pretty sick. I saw some startups pop up with public recruitment going through competitions and abusing the volunteers to push themselves to work for the cause so they can get funding from the investors for their "covid" cash cow project. I didn't have words when the guy made few announcements threatening people about unemployment, mentioning how rich they can get if they just follow him, if they don't follow him all's left for them is recession, unemployment and lot of nasty manipulating shit. Calling people losers and patting themselves on the back for solving the problem by introducing yet another surveillance clone.
- Slippery_John 6y ago
  If a crisis exposes a weakness in a system and you're making a good faith suggestion is that really a bad thing? The US government's attempts to keep people afloat have pretty clear major issues, for instance. Is it really a bad thing to suggest that we should have a system in place to handle these sorts of events, even on smaller scales, rather than trying to rush something out when every day counts? I'm not arguing for UBI per se, but if somebody thinks it's the right solution then is it a bad thing to argue for it when an example of its usefulness is fresh in everybody's mind? Obviously there are plenty of bad faith suggestions going around too, but I can't help but think platitudes like this do more to shutdown good ideas than bad.
  - noarchy 6y ago
    Stimulus cheques handed out at an actual time of crisis is not the same thing as an unending flow of such cheques during times of low unemployment and economic stability. I think that distinction is being lost in this discussion. A lot of people who are in favour of some kind of intervention right now aren't necessarily going to want to turn this permanent.
    - charlesu 6y ago
      Is low employment meaningful in a low wage environment?
    - mschuster91 6y ago
      > Stimulus cheques handed out at an actual time of crisis is not the same thing as an unending flow of such cheques during times of low unemployment and economic stability. A regular flow of such cheques compared to crisis stimulus cheques has a couple of advantages though: - you don't have any ramp-up time, not even if you decide to up the amount in crisis time, as the system already exists - you don't need to coordinate with multiple levels of governments, insurances, ... to hand out the checks - regular UBI could offset/replace many struggling programs, from food assistance over child support to other financial aid, thus leading to less overhead costs
      - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
        Most importantly, they provide a level of economic stability to the working poor that wouldn't happen with emergency measures.
        mschuster91 6y ago
        ... which is probably the reason so many wealthy-ish are against UBI. A lot of jobs would have to be paid their actual worth and in improved conditions (farming, nurses, education, trash/sewage, "nannies", cleaning, meatpacking) if those working the jobs would do it out of passion instead out of the need to survive. An awful lot of the wealth in Western states is based on this exploitation.
paulpauper 6y ago
the debate over automation and ubi has been raging ever since 2009, when a lot of jobs were permanently loss due to the crisis. Not just low-skilled jobs being threatened by middle class jobs too Pre-2009 here seemed to be much less interest and concern in regard to UBI and automation.
DennisP 6y ago
I'm sure it has nothing to do with organic interest due to a fifth of the population being out of work.
grecy 6y ago
The Corona virus situation is shining a lot of light into the dark corners of our society and the way things currently function, and it's not flattering. I saw a tweet that summed it up perfectly. "Corona virus is a black light and our current world is a c*m-stained hotel room". Given so many people are out of work, and this need for social distancing may continue for years, it's the perfect time to discuss improving society.
- noarchy 6y ago
  Did shutting down huge swaths of the economy "improve society"? Even if one agrees that is has been necessary in the short term (most seem to agree it has been needed), if we're still mired in this even mere months from now, we've probably got far bigger problems with which to contend than pushing projects like UBI.
  - grecy 6y ago
    > Did shutting down huge swaths of the economy "improve society"? Just to name a few off the top of my head: There is vastly less pollution, people are spending much more time with their loved ones, people are spending much less time in vehicles and commuting, and people have much more time to explore their passions and hobbies like instruments and drawing. > pushing projects like UBI Calm down. I'm not "pushing" anything, certainly not UBI. I simply said it's a great time to have discussions about the pros and cons of out current system, and any possible improvements. Are you against discussions?
    - noarchy 6y ago
      >There is vastly less pollution, people are spending much more time with their loved ones, people are spending much less time in vehicles and commuting, and people have much more time to explore their passions and hobbies like instruments and drawing. Some people. We have to be careful not to frame the discussion exclusively from our own, respective positions. I'm very fortunate, for instance, to be able to work from home very easily. This is not the case at all for many. Some have seen their hours increase if they're in the "essential" (a word I hate, but it has become the norm) job category, and/or have taken on risks to their health. Many have lost their jobs entirely. The reduction in pollution is good. Don't get too used to it. >Calm down. That wasn't necessary. >I'm not "pushing" anything, certainly not UBI. You may not be, but there is no question that there are many who are, and that's why this thread exists. >Are you against discussions? You've assumed something else about me, I guess?
uses 6y ago
If your default approach is cynicism, how would you know the difference between let's say a topic being relevant to world events, and fueling agendas? Like did you consider that maybe people genuinely believe that discussion regarding UBI is especially relevant during this once-in-history, civilization-disrupting event?
airstrike 6y ago
I'm actually opposed to UBI for the foreseeable future, for what it's worth, so this submission pushes no agenda of mine.
jordache 6y ago
>fuelling a lot of agendas. The ability to make a living(or have income) to sustain through these periods of challenges, is an agenda now?

I can't be the only one who has noticed the huge influx of articles and comments for UBI in places like reddit and even HN, of late. It seems that the ongoing crisis is fuelling a lot of agendas.

symplee 6y ago

Come on, you know the routine. No matter what your cause is: Never let a crisis go to waste.

searchableguy 6y ago
Some of that make me pretty sick. I saw some startups pop up with public recruitment going through competitions and abusing the volunteers to push themselves to work for the cause so they can get funding from the investors for their "covid" cash cow project. I didn't have words when the guy made few announcements threatening people about unemployment, mentioning how rich they can get if they just follow him, if they don't follow him all's left for them is recession, unemployment and lot of nasty manipulating shit. Calling people losers and patting themselves on the back for solving the problem by introducing yet another surveillance clone.
Slippery_John 6y ago
If a crisis exposes a weakness in a system and you're making a good faith suggestion is that really a bad thing? The US government's attempts to keep people afloat have pretty clear major issues, for instance. Is it really a bad thing to suggest that we should have a system in place to handle these sorts of events, even on smaller scales, rather than trying to rush something out when every day counts? I'm not arguing for UBI per se, but if somebody thinks it's the right solution then is it a bad thing to argue for it when an example of its usefulness is fresh in everybody's mind? Obviously there are plenty of bad faith suggestions going around too, but I can't help but think platitudes like this do more to shutdown good ideas than bad.
- noarchy 6y ago
  Stimulus cheques handed out at an actual time of crisis is not the same thing as an unending flow of such cheques during times of low unemployment and economic stability. I think that distinction is being lost in this discussion. A lot of people who are in favour of some kind of intervention right now aren't necessarily going to want to turn this permanent.
  - charlesu 6y ago
    Is low employment meaningful in a low wage environment?
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    > Stimulus cheques handed out at an actual time of crisis is not the same thing as an unending flow of such cheques during times of low unemployment and economic stability. A regular flow of such cheques compared to crisis stimulus cheques has a couple of advantages though: - you don't have any ramp-up time, not even if you decide to up the amount in crisis time, as the system already exists - you don't need to coordinate with multiple levels of governments, insurances, ... to hand out the checks - regular UBI could offset/replace many struggling programs, from food assistance over child support to other financial aid, thus leading to less overhead costs
    - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
      Most importantly, they provide a level of economic stability to the working poor that wouldn't happen with emergency measures.
      - mschuster91 6y ago
        ... which is probably the reason so many wealthy-ish are against UBI. A lot of jobs would have to be paid their actual worth and in improved conditions (farming, nurses, education, trash/sewage, "nannies", cleaning, meatpacking) if those working the jobs would do it out of passion instead out of the need to survive. An awful lot of the wealth in Western states is based on this exploitation.

paulpauper 6y ago

the debate over automation and ubi has been raging ever since 2009, when a lot of jobs were permanently loss due to the crisis. Not just low-skilled jobs being threatened by middle class jobs too Pre-2009 here seemed to be much less interest and concern in regard to UBI and automation.

DennisP 6y ago

I'm sure it has nothing to do with organic interest due to a fifth of the population being out of work.

grecy 6y ago

The Corona virus situation is shining a lot of light into the dark corners of our society and the way things currently function, and it's not flattering. I saw a tweet that summed it up perfectly. "Corona virus is a black light and our current world is a c*m-stained hotel room". Given so many people are out of work, and this need for social distancing may continue for years, it's the perfect time to discuss improving society.

noarchy 6y ago
Did shutting down huge swaths of the economy "improve society"? Even if one agrees that is has been necessary in the short term (most seem to agree it has been needed), if we're still mired in this even mere months from now, we've probably got far bigger problems with which to contend than pushing projects like UBI.
- grecy 6y ago
  > Did shutting down huge swaths of the economy "improve society"? Just to name a few off the top of my head: There is vastly less pollution, people are spending much more time with their loved ones, people are spending much less time in vehicles and commuting, and people have much more time to explore their passions and hobbies like instruments and drawing. > pushing projects like UBI Calm down. I'm not "pushing" anything, certainly not UBI. I simply said it's a great time to have discussions about the pros and cons of out current system, and any possible improvements. Are you against discussions?
  - noarchy 6y ago
    >There is vastly less pollution, people are spending much more time with their loved ones, people are spending much less time in vehicles and commuting, and people have much more time to explore their passions and hobbies like instruments and drawing. Some people. We have to be careful not to frame the discussion exclusively from our own, respective positions. I'm very fortunate, for instance, to be able to work from home very easily. This is not the case at all for many. Some have seen their hours increase if they're in the "essential" (a word I hate, but it has become the norm) job category, and/or have taken on risks to their health. Many have lost their jobs entirely. The reduction in pollution is good. Don't get too used to it. >Calm down. That wasn't necessary. >I'm not "pushing" anything, certainly not UBI. You may not be, but there is no question that there are many who are, and that's why this thread exists. >Are you against discussions? You've assumed something else about me, I guess?

uses 6y ago

If your default approach is cynicism, how would you know the difference between let's say a topic being relevant to world events, and fueling agendas? Like did you consider that maybe people genuinely believe that discussion regarding UBI is especially relevant during this once-in-history, civilization-disrupting event?

airstrike 6y ago

I'm actually opposed to UBI for the foreseeable future, for what it's worth, so this submission pushes no agenda of mine.

jordache 6y ago

>fuelling a lot of agendas. The ability to make a living(or have income) to sustain through these periods of challenges, is an agenda now?