3 ms·

If a person receiving UBI (which Sam Altman is a big supporter of), publicly espoused views such as neo-Nazi views, would anyone say that this person should con

If a person receiving UBI (which Sam Altman is a big supporter of), publicly espoused views such as neo-Nazi views, would anyone say that this person should continue to receive UBI? What if they lived in an inexpensive area and the UBI was sufficient to allow full-time focus on such views?

drak0n1c 6y ago
I've heard sincere leftist advocates for universal healthcare and universal basic income argue that it should be truly universal and they said yes, neo-nazis should get it too. Means-testing and adding criteria is starting to become an anathema concept to those who are ideologically committed to universal state benefits. However, that kind of consistent integrity may not extend to the politicians implementing it or the wider public.
ramblerman 6y ago
Yes. UBI can easily be tied to the existing legal system. Defining a list of topics and views that would take your UBI away is the ugliest big brother/dystopian future I can imagine. Who manages the list?
kilburn 6y ago
> would anyone say that this person should continue to receive UBI? I would. There are two ways to look at this: 1. We are supporting this person through UBI. We don't want to support neo-Nazi people. Therefore they should not receive UBI. 2. Neo-nazism is an issue we want to solve. Neo-nazism only dies when no significant portion of society shares that view anymore. Notice that this is very different from "when a majority of society thinks it should be eradicated" (which is where we are now). If you focus in the latter view, cutting UBI to publicly known supporters won't help because: - It would foster the "us vs them" holy war between supporters and society at large. This will only strengthen that minority. - It poses significant (i.e.: expensive to solve) logistical issues. How do you detect neo-nazi supporters? Who makes the decision? How can such decision be appealed? I see neo-nazism as a virus and education as a vaccine. Cutting UBI to identified supporters is akin to cutting life support to people displaying advanced symptoms. Would that really help?

drak0n1c 6y ago

I've heard sincere leftist advocates for universal healthcare and universal basic income argue that it should be truly universal and they said yes, neo-nazis should get it too. Means-testing and adding criteria is starting to become an anathema concept to those who are ideologically committed to universal state benefits. However, that kind of consistent integrity may not extend to the politicians implementing it or the wider public.

ramblerman 6y ago

Yes. UBI can easily be tied to the existing legal system. Defining a list of topics and views that would take your UBI away is the ugliest big brother/dystopian future I can imagine. Who manages the list?

kilburn 6y ago

> would anyone say that this person should continue to receive UBI? I would. There are two ways to look at this: 1. We are supporting this person through UBI. We don't want to support neo-Nazi people. Therefore they should not receive UBI. 2. Neo-nazism is an issue we want to solve. Neo-nazism only dies when no significant portion of society shares that view anymore. Notice that this is very different from "when a majority of society thinks it should be eradicated" (which is where we are now). If you focus in the latter view, cutting UBI to publicly known supporters won't help because: - It would foster the "us vs them" holy war between supporters and society at large. This will only strengthen that minority. - It poses significant (i.e.: expensive to solve) logistical issues. How do you detect neo-nazi supporters? Who makes the decision? How can such decision be appealed? I see neo-nazism as a virus and education as a vaccine. Cutting UBI to identified supporters is akin to cutting life support to people displaying advanced symptoms. Would that really help?