6 ms·

^^This This is the only argument I present to people that talk to me about UBI in a positive way, ie they want UBI. If people are given enough money to live o

^^This This is the only argument I present to people that talk to me about UBI in a positive way, ie they want UBI. If people are given enough money to live on for free I would wager there is zero incentive for them to be productive within society. Zero. Change my mind!

learnstats2 6y ago
Perhaps it depends what you mean by 'productive'. There is less incentive for people to survive financially by doing unethical work on behalf of powerful and wealthy people, OK, we can agree on that. But, is (for example) cooking and cleaning and caring for others 'productive'? We don't see that in macroeconomic figures, so it doesn't count - but most people do a huge amount of that without being motivated by pay. My understanding of the world is that most people are even more motivated to do things for others that don't bring a financial reward.
- _Understated_ 6y ago
  I suppose I should clarify what I mean by productive. I'm using it in it's lowest sense: paying back into society to fund all the other stuff that government will want money for. So, basically, we will have more takers than producers, therefore, it cannot possibly work. Sure, you'll get poets, artists and the like taking advantage of it and society will be better off in the long run for it... probably. I don't know, never studied that stuff before. But the immediate problem is that you will have a shit-ton of leeches that will take the money and play video games all day long. It can't possibly be financially viable. But to pick up a point from your comment: > Is (for example) cooking and cleaning and caring for others 'productive'? I'd wager that it can be for two possible reasons: 1. It perhaps allows the person being cared for to help society in some way (either directly through taxes or poetry etc.) 2. The cleaner gets paid and ultimately puts money back into society. And yes, there are tons of "non-jobs" where nothing is ultimately created, I get it. But that won't go away with UBI: banks will still have too many employees doing nothing all day (source - worked in banks for years!) On another note: I live in Scotland and I will bet that within 5 years we will have UBI... we're already bankrupt so, hey, what's another £50Bn a year added to the unpayable debt pile :)
  - drekembe 6y ago
    Wouldn't those people with non-jobs just quit and receive UBI then? If that is indeed what would happen (as you claim), why would those non-job havers at the bank keep working them?
  - ohgodplsno 6y ago
    Ah, the "leeches" argument. Lett's start with the obvious: it doesn't matter that some people will do nothing. It doesn't matter that some people will not be working. Not only are the benefits to society great (the yearly costs for society of homeless people, or similar scenarios are much greaterthan a simple $12k.), you're looking to cut off everyone from UBI because what, 5% would not be working? So, kind of like unemployment today then. We've come far enough as first world societies that we can ensure that everyone gets a liveable amount of money every month. And don't forget that UBI cuts off every other kind of aid. Go live a life with $1000 a month, and you'll realise that you have to be in a very particular mindset to stay at home and do nothing. In addition, it's also a great thing for the economy, as money is actually being used to pay things, and circulating taxed away from the cash hoarding dragons that are billionaires. That makes Keynes happy.
    - AdrianB1 6y ago
      What if the percent of the people on UBI doing nothing will get to 60%? What if they vote themselves more money? In half of my country (in Europe) people would be extremely satisfied to live on $1000 per month, it is triple of what they live on today. I know people in Western Europe that would be quite happy to get $1000 and not have to go to work for that (they earn more, but the difference does not make up for their time and effort).
    - _Understated_ 6y ago
      > you're looking to cut off everyone from UBI because what, 5% would not be working I don't believe that it would only be 5% but yes, I am. Living in the UK means we have a welfare system. It's not fair, hopelessly bureaucratic and probably corrupt as hell but we have one. There is no way that giving everyone (eligible?) £1000 a month will take a whole bunch of people out of poverty because managing finances is a skill that no one is taught in schools. People who have good jobs and earn good money can't manage it as is. So by giving free money to millions of people they're likely to fritter it away or piss it away thus wasting billions. > cash hoarding dragons Your issue is with them. They won't pay for UBI. I will. You will. Everyone else but them will pay for it. It will not work.[0] [0] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47169549 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47169549
em-bee 6y ago
it's all about education and sozialisation. people want to be recognized for their achievements. they don't want to be recognized as a couch potato. if what you say were true, then why would anyone work more than what they need to cover their expenses now? yes, people say they don't want to work. but what they really mean is that they don't want to work bad jobs just because they have to. why do people do volunteer work? again, what incentive to do volunteers work do people have now? lots of work without much reward. yet people still do it. UBI won't change that, but it will give more people the opportunity to do volunteer work, or do more of it. many jobs today are not actually producutive for society. people do them because they pay. and they will continue doing them because UBI won't enable you to have expensive vacations or other luxuries that you might enjoy. on the other hand, people stuck in bad jobs may be enabled to quit them, because it won't cost them their home or their insurance. pay will rise because people don't need to accept hard labor for minimum wage anymore.
- cringepirate 6y ago
  > it's all about education and sozialisation. people want to be recognized for their achievements. they don't want to be recognized as a couch potato. if what you say were true, then why would anyone work more than what they need to cover their expenses now? I honestly think that many people here haven't actually been around scumbags and haven't seen the effects of welfare dependency. I have. Half of my family are welfare dependant and there is nothing wrong with any of them. My step brother drank so much he gave himself something called "wet brain", my step sisters are both single mothers that have never worked in their life (and don't intend to). The last time I bothered going to see them, they all got arrested. This is a direct consequence of them being able to live on "the dole" in the UK. > yes, people say they don't want to work. but what they really mean is that they don't want to work bad jobs just because they have to. In almost every western country people are given a free education, will be given credit to study and there are plenty of opportunities so they don't have to work a "bad job" (whatever that means but more on that later). I saved up plenty of money so I could start my own business with my own clients. I did things the right way by using my initiative and saving up. Now I get to work on what I want, when I want to, go on holiday when I want to. Also before I graduated uni I worked these "bad jobs". They weren't that bad. I actually got quite a lot of exercise, they were certainly more social than programming and I met more women. To put it crudely I think people bitch too much. > why do people do volunteer work? again, what incentive to do volunteers work do people have now? lots of work without much reward. yet people still do it. UBI won't change that, but it will give more people the opportunity to do volunteer work, or do more of it. I actually worked at a charity with many volunteers. After being in meetings and have discussions with volunteers. None of it was for altruistic reasons. It was for experience so they could get another career elsewhere or they got a free certification to do a job in another country half the year (many moved between the UK and Australia based on the season). Now that certainly isn't every volunteer. > on the other hand, people stuck in bad jobs may be enabled to quit them, because it won't cost them their home or their insurance. pay will rise because people don't need to accept hard labor for minimum wage anymore. This is another poor argument for two reasons. 1) Prices will rise if there is more money around. I live in the Midlands in the UK. Prices on everyday items (bread milk etc) is about 2/3rds what they are down South and about 1/2 of what they are in London. Do you know why the disparity? It is because people in the North and the Midlands are less well off than the South / South East England. 2) Very few jobs these days are hard labour. Even so plenty of people do want these jobs. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coronavirus-farming-jobs-search-record-feed-nation-campaign-a9458436.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coronavirus... 3) There is normally nothing stopping people from learning outside of work. Especially now with online learning. And you can't tell me it isn't possible. You know why? I visited a friend in Cambodia, his wife who couldn't read until she was 18, learned to read while literally doing back breaking work in the rice fields for well over 10 hours a day. If someone with no education what-so-ever can learn how to read and pay to go to school (it isn't free there) people over here who are given all the opportunities in the world can do so to.
spyckie2 6y ago
UBI isn't enough money to live on for free. It's about half that. 12k is enough money to live but your standard of living is worse enough to be visibly felt. If you look at https://www.gapminder.org/dollar-street/ https://www.gapminder.org/dollar-street/, 12k / yr generally the level where most essentials are visible around the world. But you're likely not going to have: 1) A car 2) A house 3) Feed a family 4) Savings 5) An expensive hobby You'd need about another 5-10k on the UBI check to really make this argument for UBI... which you get through working.
- AdrianB1 6y ago
  First, you don't need savings if you have UBI forever. Second, you ignore the basics of economics of demand and supply: if a large enough proportion of the population lies on UBI you will even find cars cheap enough for them, either second hand or purpose built. True story, Renault is a car manufacturer that sells their cars for prices very similar to everyone else, but they built for some years a model that was selling for 5000 Euro (about $6000 at that time) new, with a modern and solid engine and all the safety features mandated by law in Europe. That car was also sold in France for a lot more (8000 euro or more) just because people in France afforded to pay more. Now Renault is still selling 7000 Euro cars (Dacia Sandero) that are really good for the money, while selling Renault branded cars for around 20,000 Euro and more.
  - spyckie2 6y ago
    Not sure if you're a student or never had an income, but savings are not just for retirement. Savings, as opposed to a retirement plan, are for major life decisions like buying a car, getting married, supporting a family, upgrading your standard of living, taking care of emergencies, and affording expensive opportunities (like moving or traveling, for instance). Also, no, the basics of supply and demand will not make cheap cars a thing. It's not the cost of a car that you can't afford, it's the cost of maintenance. Fuel, maintenance, and insurance (mandatory in the US btw) are all costs to use the car - the average being around $100/mth. https://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/cost-to-own-a-vehicle/ https://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/cost-to-own-a-vehicle/ -> 1.1k And also no, new cars will not become cheaper over time in the US. There's already 19% of the US families who make under 24k a year (we roughly double UBI to account for 2 adult UBI incomes and one car per household rule). That's 24 million households already out of the 130m households in the US. The market for used cars is actually quite big (17.6 million transactions / yr) which is probably why there isn't an $8200 new US car offering (which, btw, requires savings in order to purchase). Back to my original point, if you have a budget of 1k/month, you could spend ~$400 on rent, $300 on food, $100 on your car, $100 on personal needs, and $100 on misc / emergencies in a small suburban town (like the outskirts of Pittsburgh) -> I've done this in college before. But realistically you would need an extra ~$600-1000 a month to pay for things like - internet, health insurance, furniture, clothes, laptop, phone, heating / ac bill, eating out every so often, a social life, hobbies, travel, etc. So yes, you'd still want double of your UBI income.
fsloth 6y ago
"If people are given enough money to live on for free I would wager there is zero incentive for them to be productive within society. Zero." Take any country with wide social safety nets. You don't really need to work in them to live. At least in my country most people prefer working. There is a small subculture of some families that seem to pass on unemployment as a way of life to their children but those are really ,really few. My answer is - I don't know the general answer. In my culture people prefer working to not working, even though they don't have to. But I don't know if this applies universally.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  Because we want something more from life than mindless consumption. Work can be fulfilling. If money is not a problem what is to stop you from doing something that interests you? Being part of a community, learning some cool new skill. The idea that everyone will become a zombie on UBI sound unfounded. Yes there are useless destructive people out there, they thrive on misery and pain. Capitalism, UBI, Communism, neither will fix them. But why present them as a example of how system will fail. What about next great artist that went into ad company and never took a chance to do their art. Or a next great tinker or inventor stuck in some soul draining 5-9 in a factory buried under medical debt. What about those who would have a chance to create something tenfold the value they create now?
  - cringepirate 6y ago
    > Work can be fulfilling. If money is not a problem what is to stop you from doing something that interests you? There is nothing stopping you from doing that today. It just doesn't happen immediately. The vast majority of people will enter the workplace and as they gain more experience they typically will not only earn more but have more opportunities and have a professional network. > Being part of a community, learning some cool new skill. You can already do that outside of work. If people really want to do these things they will find the time. > The idea that everyone will become a zombie on UBI sound unfounded. Nobody claims they will become a zombie. What people claim is that it will create a underclass of people that are dependant on the state. Many people don't believe this is unfounded. People are driven by incentives e.g. When I worked minimum wage I was often asked to do overtime. I didn't earn a lot and would have gladly have taken up the offer if it was a worth it. The moment I did any overtime I went over the minimum threshold for income tax and any money I earned from the overtime offered was almost undone by the amount of extra tax that was taken from my paycheck. > Yes there are useless destructive people out there, they thrive on misery and pain. Capitalism, UBI, Communism, neither will fix them. But why present them as a example of how system will fail. Because some of these destructive people are products of their environment where their parents and them have lived on benefits which in turn showed their children that they could just do the same and they didn't have to get work. I have seen this personally happen. > What about next great artist that went into ad company and never took a chance to do their art. > Or a next great tinker or inventor stuck in some soul draining 5-9 in a factory buried under medical debt. > What about those who would have a chance to create something tenfold the value they create now? Truly exceptional people won't be held back and currently western societies give people plenty of opportunities to do that. Typically for both men and women once they have a family most of their efforts will go towards that rather than any lofty goals as their priorities change once they have a child.
drekembe 6y ago
What kind of percentage of people that have jobs today do you think are really productive in society and benefiting it? I think having a job does not mean you are benefiting society. You can be a telemarketer, a manager in a pesticide factory or developing new ad tracking technology. In my opinion, it'd be much better for those people to stay at home with their kids and get UBI. And like I said in my other comment, there are a bunch of incentives. People usually want to have more money to save up, buy more stuff, feel more secure, etc. so people would work to have more money than the basic income. Apart from that, people want jobs to have a higher status among their peers and some people genuinely like what they do. If UBI was introduced, would you personally sit around all day or would you continue working? If you'd continue working, what makes you think you're the only one?
- _Understated_ 6y ago
  Cherry picking jobs that stir emotions doesn't count: these jobs exists purely due to supply and demand... someone wants this shitty thing done so there will be someone available to do it. That won't change. Utopian societies don't exist but giving people free money that is paid for by the middle class (yes, the middle class will fund this, not the billionaires!) is not the answer.
jasondelta 6y ago
What difference is it to you how someone chooses to live their life? I don't understand how this is an argument for anything except to prove your own intolerance.
EarthMephit 6y ago
Doesn't that article that you're commenting on address this? The study found that the people on the UBI payments we're more likely to be employed than the reference group - Its clearly wildly incorrect to say that there's zero incentive to find work

learnstats2 6y ago

Perhaps it depends what you mean by 'productive'. There is less incentive for people to survive financially by doing unethical work on behalf of powerful and wealthy people, OK, we can agree on that. But, is (for example) cooking and cleaning and caring for others 'productive'? We don't see that in macroeconomic figures, so it doesn't count - but most people do a huge amount of that without being motivated by pay. My understanding of the world is that most people are even more motivated to do things for others that don't bring a financial reward.

_Understated_ 6y ago
I suppose I should clarify what I mean by productive. I'm using it in it's lowest sense: paying back into society to fund all the other stuff that government will want money for. So, basically, we will have more takers than producers, therefore, it cannot possibly work. Sure, you'll get poets, artists and the like taking advantage of it and society will be better off in the long run for it... probably. I don't know, never studied that stuff before. But the immediate problem is that you will have a shit-ton of leeches that will take the money and play video games all day long. It can't possibly be financially viable. But to pick up a point from your comment: > Is (for example) cooking and cleaning and caring for others 'productive'? I'd wager that it can be for two possible reasons: 1. It perhaps allows the person being cared for to help society in some way (either directly through taxes or poetry etc.) 2. The cleaner gets paid and ultimately puts money back into society. And yes, there are tons of "non-jobs" where nothing is ultimately created, I get it. But that won't go away with UBI: banks will still have too many employees doing nothing all day (source - worked in banks for years!) On another note: I live in Scotland and I will bet that within 5 years we will have UBI... we're already bankrupt so, hey, what's another £50Bn a year added to the unpayable debt pile :)
- drekembe 6y ago
  Wouldn't those people with non-jobs just quit and receive UBI then? If that is indeed what would happen (as you claim), why would those non-job havers at the bank keep working them?
- ohgodplsno 6y ago
  Ah, the "leeches" argument. Lett's start with the obvious: it doesn't matter that some people will do nothing. It doesn't matter that some people will not be working. Not only are the benefits to society great (the yearly costs for society of homeless people, or similar scenarios are much greaterthan a simple $12k.), you're looking to cut off everyone from UBI because what, 5% would not be working? So, kind of like unemployment today then. We've come far enough as first world societies that we can ensure that everyone gets a liveable amount of money every month. And don't forget that UBI cuts off every other kind of aid. Go live a life with $1000 a month, and you'll realise that you have to be in a very particular mindset to stay at home and do nothing. In addition, it's also a great thing for the economy, as money is actually being used to pay things, and circulating taxed away from the cash hoarding dragons that are billionaires. That makes Keynes happy.
  - AdrianB1 6y ago
    What if the percent of the people on UBI doing nothing will get to 60%? What if they vote themselves more money? In half of my country (in Europe) people would be extremely satisfied to live on $1000 per month, it is triple of what they live on today. I know people in Western Europe that would be quite happy to get $1000 and not have to go to work for that (they earn more, but the difference does not make up for their time and effort).
  - _Understated_ 6y ago
    > you're looking to cut off everyone from UBI because what, 5% would not be working I don't believe that it would only be 5% but yes, I am. Living in the UK means we have a welfare system. It's not fair, hopelessly bureaucratic and probably corrupt as hell but we have one. There is no way that giving everyone (eligible?) £1000 a month will take a whole bunch of people out of poverty because managing finances is a skill that no one is taught in schools. People who have good jobs and earn good money can't manage it as is. So by giving free money to millions of people they're likely to fritter it away or piss it away thus wasting billions. > cash hoarding dragons Your issue is with them. They won't pay for UBI. I will. You will. Everyone else but them will pay for it. It will not work.[0] [0] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47169549 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47169549

em-bee 6y ago

it's all about education and sozialisation. people want to be recognized for their achievements. they don't want to be recognized as a couch potato. if what you say were true, then why would anyone work more than what they need to cover their expenses now? yes, people say they don't want to work. but what they really mean is that they don't want to work bad jobs just because they have to. why do people do volunteer work? again, what incentive to do volunteers work do people have now? lots of work without much reward. yet people still do it. UBI won't change that, but it will give more people the opportunity to do volunteer work, or do more of it. many jobs today are not actually producutive for society. people do them because they pay. and they will continue doing them because UBI won't enable you to have expensive vacations or other luxuries that you might enjoy. on the other hand, people stuck in bad jobs may be enabled to quit them, because it won't cost them their home or their insurance. pay will rise because people don't need to accept hard labor for minimum wage anymore.

cringepirate 6y ago
> it's all about education and sozialisation. people want to be recognized for their achievements. they don't want to be recognized as a couch potato. if what you say were true, then why would anyone work more than what they need to cover their expenses now? I honestly think that many people here haven't actually been around scumbags and haven't seen the effects of welfare dependency. I have. Half of my family are welfare dependant and there is nothing wrong with any of them. My step brother drank so much he gave himself something called "wet brain", my step sisters are both single mothers that have never worked in their life (and don't intend to). The last time I bothered going to see them, they all got arrested. This is a direct consequence of them being able to live on "the dole" in the UK. > yes, people say they don't want to work. but what they really mean is that they don't want to work bad jobs just because they have to. In almost every western country people are given a free education, will be given credit to study and there are plenty of opportunities so they don't have to work a "bad job" (whatever that means but more on that later). I saved up plenty of money so I could start my own business with my own clients. I did things the right way by using my initiative and saving up. Now I get to work on what I want, when I want to, go on holiday when I want to. Also before I graduated uni I worked these "bad jobs". They weren't that bad. I actually got quite a lot of exercise, they were certainly more social than programming and I met more women. To put it crudely I think people bitch too much. > why do people do volunteer work? again, what incentive to do volunteers work do people have now? lots of work without much reward. yet people still do it. UBI won't change that, but it will give more people the opportunity to do volunteer work, or do more of it. I actually worked at a charity with many volunteers. After being in meetings and have discussions with volunteers. None of it was for altruistic reasons. It was for experience so they could get another career elsewhere or they got a free certification to do a job in another country half the year (many moved between the UK and Australia based on the season). Now that certainly isn't every volunteer. > on the other hand, people stuck in bad jobs may be enabled to quit them, because it won't cost them their home or their insurance. pay will rise because people don't need to accept hard labor for minimum wage anymore. This is another poor argument for two reasons. 1) Prices will rise if there is more money around. I live in the Midlands in the UK. Prices on everyday items (bread milk etc) is about 2/3rds what they are down South and about 1/2 of what they are in London. Do you know why the disparity? It is because people in the North and the Midlands are less well off than the South / South East England. 2) Very few jobs these days are hard labour. Even so plenty of people do want these jobs. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coronavirus-farming-jobs-search-record-feed-nation-campaign-a9458436.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coronavirus... 3) There is normally nothing stopping people from learning outside of work. Especially now with online learning. And you can't tell me it isn't possible. You know why? I visited a friend in Cambodia, his wife who couldn't read until she was 18, learned to read while literally doing back breaking work in the rice fields for well over 10 hours a day. If someone with no education what-so-ever can learn how to read and pay to go to school (it isn't free there) people over here who are given all the opportunities in the world can do so to.

spyckie2 6y ago

UBI isn't enough money to live on for free. It's about half that. 12k is enough money to live but your standard of living is worse enough to be visibly felt. If you look at https://www.gapminder.org/dollar-street/ https://www.gapminder.org/dollar-street/, 12k / yr generally the level where most essentials are visible around the world. But you're likely not going to have: 1) A car 2) A house 3) Feed a family 4) Savings 5) An expensive hobby You'd need about another 5-10k on the UBI check to really make this argument for UBI... which you get through working.

AdrianB1 6y ago
First, you don't need savings if you have UBI forever. Second, you ignore the basics of economics of demand and supply: if a large enough proportion of the population lies on UBI you will even find cars cheap enough for them, either second hand or purpose built. True story, Renault is a car manufacturer that sells their cars for prices very similar to everyone else, but they built for some years a model that was selling for 5000 Euro (about $6000 at that time) new, with a modern and solid engine and all the safety features mandated by law in Europe. That car was also sold in France for a lot more (8000 euro or more) just because people in France afforded to pay more. Now Renault is still selling 7000 Euro cars (Dacia Sandero) that are really good for the money, while selling Renault branded cars for around 20,000 Euro and more.
- spyckie2 6y ago
  Not sure if you're a student or never had an income, but savings are not just for retirement. Savings, as opposed to a retirement plan, are for major life decisions like buying a car, getting married, supporting a family, upgrading your standard of living, taking care of emergencies, and affording expensive opportunities (like moving or traveling, for instance). Also, no, the basics of supply and demand will not make cheap cars a thing. It's not the cost of a car that you can't afford, it's the cost of maintenance. Fuel, maintenance, and insurance (mandatory in the US btw) are all costs to use the car - the average being around $100/mth. https://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/cost-to-own-a-vehicle/ https://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/cost-to-own-a-vehicle/ -> 1.1k And also no, new cars will not become cheaper over time in the US. There's already 19% of the US families who make under 24k a year (we roughly double UBI to account for 2 adult UBI incomes and one car per household rule). That's 24 million households already out of the 130m households in the US. The market for used cars is actually quite big (17.6 million transactions / yr) which is probably why there isn't an $8200 new US car offering (which, btw, requires savings in order to purchase). Back to my original point, if you have a budget of 1k/month, you could spend ~$400 on rent, $300 on food, $100 on your car, $100 on personal needs, and $100 on misc / emergencies in a small suburban town (like the outskirts of Pittsburgh) -> I've done this in college before. But realistically you would need an extra ~$600-1000 a month to pay for things like - internet, health insurance, furniture, clothes, laptop, phone, heating / ac bill, eating out every so often, a social life, hobbies, travel, etc. So yes, you'd still want double of your UBI income.

fsloth 6y ago

"If people are given enough money to live on for free I would wager there is zero incentive for them to be productive within society. Zero." Take any country with wide social safety nets. You don't really need to work in them to live. At least in my country most people prefer working. There is a small subculture of some families that seem to pass on unemployment as a way of life to their children but those are really ,really few. My answer is - I don't know the general answer. In my culture people prefer working to not working, even though they don't have to. But I don't know if this applies universally.

me_me_me 6y ago
Because we want something more from life than mindless consumption. Work can be fulfilling. If money is not a problem what is to stop you from doing something that interests you? Being part of a community, learning some cool new skill. The idea that everyone will become a zombie on UBI sound unfounded. Yes there are useless destructive people out there, they thrive on misery and pain. Capitalism, UBI, Communism, neither will fix them. But why present them as a example of how system will fail. What about next great artist that went into ad company and never took a chance to do their art. Or a next great tinker or inventor stuck in some soul draining 5-9 in a factory buried under medical debt. What about those who would have a chance to create something tenfold the value they create now?
- cringepirate 6y ago
  > Work can be fulfilling. If money is not a problem what is to stop you from doing something that interests you? There is nothing stopping you from doing that today. It just doesn't happen immediately. The vast majority of people will enter the workplace and as they gain more experience they typically will not only earn more but have more opportunities and have a professional network. > Being part of a community, learning some cool new skill. You can already do that outside of work. If people really want to do these things they will find the time. > The idea that everyone will become a zombie on UBI sound unfounded. Nobody claims they will become a zombie. What people claim is that it will create a underclass of people that are dependant on the state. Many people don't believe this is unfounded. People are driven by incentives e.g. When I worked minimum wage I was often asked to do overtime. I didn't earn a lot and would have gladly have taken up the offer if it was a worth it. The moment I did any overtime I went over the minimum threshold for income tax and any money I earned from the overtime offered was almost undone by the amount of extra tax that was taken from my paycheck. > Yes there are useless destructive people out there, they thrive on misery and pain. Capitalism, UBI, Communism, neither will fix them. But why present them as a example of how system will fail. Because some of these destructive people are products of their environment where their parents and them have lived on benefits which in turn showed their children that they could just do the same and they didn't have to get work. I have seen this personally happen. > What about next great artist that went into ad company and never took a chance to do their art. > Or a next great tinker or inventor stuck in some soul draining 5-9 in a factory buried under medical debt. > What about those who would have a chance to create something tenfold the value they create now? Truly exceptional people won't be held back and currently western societies give people plenty of opportunities to do that. Typically for both men and women once they have a family most of their efforts will go towards that rather than any lofty goals as their priorities change once they have a child.

drekembe 6y ago

What kind of percentage of people that have jobs today do you think are really productive in society and benefiting it? I think having a job does not mean you are benefiting society. You can be a telemarketer, a manager in a pesticide factory or developing new ad tracking technology. In my opinion, it'd be much better for those people to stay at home with their kids and get UBI. And like I said in my other comment, there are a bunch of incentives. People usually want to have more money to save up, buy more stuff, feel more secure, etc. so people would work to have more money than the basic income. Apart from that, people want jobs to have a higher status among their peers and some people genuinely like what they do. If UBI was introduced, would you personally sit around all day or would you continue working? If you'd continue working, what makes you think you're the only one?

_Understated_ 6y ago
Cherry picking jobs that stir emotions doesn't count: these jobs exists purely due to supply and demand... someone wants this shitty thing done so there will be someone available to do it. That won't change. Utopian societies don't exist but giving people free money that is paid for by the middle class (yes, the middle class will fund this, not the billionaires!) is not the answer.

jasondelta 6y ago

What difference is it to you how someone chooses to live their life? I don't understand how this is an argument for anything except to prove your own intolerance.

EarthMephit 6y ago

Doesn't that article that you're commenting on address this? The study found that the people on the UBI payments we're more likely to be employed than the reference group - Its clearly wildly incorrect to say that there's zero incentive to find work