3 ms·

Since I've started working I've been aggressively investing close to half my monthly paychecks into high-yield dividend stocks with the goal of attaining my own

Since I've started working I've been aggressively investing close to half my monthly paychecks into high-yield dividend stocks with the goal of attaining my own level of UBI. A few years ago, when I was unemployed for several months, I noticed that doing nothing all day gets boring real fast. I know that if I had my own UBI I'd definitely go pursue some sort of venture. However, I also noticed that my cousin, who has been unemployed for the past 4 months, is just focused on playing video games, while his mom supports him. From this, I've concluded that the effects of UBI will vary greatly from person to person. Before implementing UBI, I think we need to determine what % of the population will get bored and attempt to do something else, and what % of the population will just pool their attention into unproductive time sinks - maybe the Pareto principle will come into play here?

nefitty 5y ago
Within the context of the reality that eventually your cousin will have to work and sustain himself, isn’t it rational to capitalize on the immediate free time he has? He may never again get that same stretch of stress-less time to just dither. I think, on a playing field where people knew they could just literally sit in a chair all day for the rest of their lives, other motivations would eventually reveal themselves besides sloth. People would shift focus to power, charity, status, popularity, etc. As it stands, those games seem to be what make a society more complex, but they are usually reserved for people who have already figured out the money game first...
- dmingod666 5y ago
  I always feel this deep repulsion towards society. At first there was a time when people were free, they could grow what they wanted and live how they wanted nobody gave a damn because you cannot tell me what to do with my life. Then, as a society, you herd the population into cities where they can't grow their food, put the poor into forced service of the rich or they can't feed themselves or live. The poor lower class beings have the moral burden of working else they are some sort of lowly scumbag. The rich, they don't have this constraint - they are morally obligated to just live their lives. The thinking that, "but hey! that guy is just going to sit in his chair and not do anything" - Well, that's exactly what people that have lots of money do right now. They just live their lives, they sit in their nice chairs for as long as they want - nobody blinks an eyelid. The moment you think a poor person is not working you start to think he is scum. Look, its a game that makes things better for everyone and it has its upsides, agreed. The thing is - society does not need to be like it is right now. Between money and institutions people are literally put in a cage with no real escape hatch. The inability to escape all this "money-govt-society" is the problem. Say a tiger wanted to claim an area and feed itself and be self sufficient he could do it. Now, we like to think we're better than animals. Are we really? all of us? Say you as a person with zero money decided to just build your house using things you find around that area that you don't own and try to live off the land. You cant do that, someones going to come knocking saying you're on someone elses property. That tiger out there is more free than the person. Problem is, there is no escape hatch where you say, screw civilization I want to be free - I don't want what it has to offer, I live on this land here. Only if you have sufficient amount of money are you actually free to live as you want. Otherwise you better stay in your economic-class and feed the monster of society..
  - Jorengarenar 5y ago
    > At first there was a time when people were free, they could grow what they wanted and live how they wanted nobody gave a damn because you cannot tell me what to do with my life. When exactly was that? Because you know, humans are apes. And we don't observe any apes, any monkeys, any primates which are free from their societal norms. So when exactly were humans (or any other kind of ape) entirely free? Before our ancestors even evolved into monkeys? > Say a tiger wanted to claim an area and feed itself and be self sufficient he could do it. Unless other, stronger tiger decided otherwise. And why are you choosing non-social animal to compare to social one? If you want a big cat then pick lion for comparison. Because lions gather into prides (and not without reasons).
    - dmingod666 5y ago
      "When exactly was that? Because you know, humans are apes." An ape can leave its group and move to a different territory and not have someone else decide his life for him. If there is no path for being able to attempt self sustenance, to be able to live and grow your own food, to be able to choose what social group you want to be a part of, you are stuck in the game - you have to make money, whether you like it or not. All other living creature on earth can get by just fine without having imaginary against their name in a database. The cruelty is in the fact that society holds and hoards all the resources that will let you live and will make those available only if you have those imaginary numbers. It is presented as being for the greater good of everyone, but in essence the whole system is put in place so people that don't have resources can be pressured to do the dirty work of the people that have the resources.
      - Jorengarenar 5y ago
        Fruits, rotten meat, mushrooms, roots - all of those are still in the jungle. What's holding you back from abandoning the achievements of modern society and embracing the livelihood of primitive, but "free" animal?
      - kleer001 5y ago
        > An ape can leave its group and move to a different territory and not have someone else decide his life for him. Ah, the myth of the noble savage taken to evolutionary extreme. I highly recommend Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate" if you'd like to disabuse yourself of this pernicious old wives tale. Then his "Better angels of our nature" should fix you right up with a more accurate and informed view of the world and society we live in.

nefitty 5y ago

Within the context of the reality that eventually your cousin will have to work and sustain himself, isn’t it rational to capitalize on the immediate free time he has? He may never again get that same stretch of stress-less time to just dither. I think, on a playing field where people knew they could just literally sit in a chair all day for the rest of their lives, other motivations would eventually reveal themselves besides sloth. People would shift focus to power, charity, status, popularity, etc. As it stands, those games seem to be what make a society more complex, but they are usually reserved for people who have already figured out the money game first...

dmingod666 5y ago
I always feel this deep repulsion towards society. At first there was a time when people were free, they could grow what they wanted and live how they wanted nobody gave a damn because you cannot tell me what to do with my life. Then, as a society, you herd the population into cities where they can't grow their food, put the poor into forced service of the rich or they can't feed themselves or live. The poor lower class beings have the moral burden of working else they are some sort of lowly scumbag. The rich, they don't have this constraint - they are morally obligated to just live their lives. The thinking that, "but hey! that guy is just going to sit in his chair and not do anything" - Well, that's exactly what people that have lots of money do right now. They just live their lives, they sit in their nice chairs for as long as they want - nobody blinks an eyelid. The moment you think a poor person is not working you start to think he is scum. Look, its a game that makes things better for everyone and it has its upsides, agreed. The thing is - society does not need to be like it is right now. Between money and institutions people are literally put in a cage with no real escape hatch. The inability to escape all this "money-govt-society" is the problem. Say a tiger wanted to claim an area and feed itself and be self sufficient he could do it. Now, we like to think we're better than animals. Are we really? all of us? Say you as a person with zero money decided to just build your house using things you find around that area that you don't own and try to live off the land. You cant do that, someones going to come knocking saying you're on someone elses property. That tiger out there is more free than the person. Problem is, there is no escape hatch where you say, screw civilization I want to be free - I don't want what it has to offer, I live on this land here. Only if you have sufficient amount of money are you actually free to live as you want. Otherwise you better stay in your economic-class and feed the monster of society..
- Jorengarenar 5y ago
  > At first there was a time when people were free, they could grow what they wanted and live how they wanted nobody gave a damn because you cannot tell me what to do with my life. When exactly was that? Because you know, humans are apes. And we don't observe any apes, any monkeys, any primates which are free from their societal norms. So when exactly were humans (or any other kind of ape) entirely free? Before our ancestors even evolved into monkeys? > Say a tiger wanted to claim an area and feed itself and be self sufficient he could do it. Unless other, stronger tiger decided otherwise. And why are you choosing non-social animal to compare to social one? If you want a big cat then pick lion for comparison. Because lions gather into prides (and not without reasons).
  - dmingod666 5y ago
    "When exactly was that? Because you know, humans are apes." An ape can leave its group and move to a different territory and not have someone else decide his life for him. If there is no path for being able to attempt self sustenance, to be able to live and grow your own food, to be able to choose what social group you want to be a part of, you are stuck in the game - you have to make money, whether you like it or not. All other living creature on earth can get by just fine without having imaginary against their name in a database. The cruelty is in the fact that society holds and hoards all the resources that will let you live and will make those available only if you have those imaginary numbers. It is presented as being for the greater good of everyone, but in essence the whole system is put in place so people that don't have resources can be pressured to do the dirty work of the people that have the resources.
    - Jorengarenar 5y ago
      Fruits, rotten meat, mushrooms, roots - all of those are still in the jungle. What's holding you back from abandoning the achievements of modern society and embracing the livelihood of primitive, but "free" animal?
    - kleer001 5y ago
      > An ape can leave its group and move to a different territory and not have someone else decide his life for him. Ah, the myth of the noble savage taken to evolutionary extreme. I highly recommend Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate" if you'd like to disabuse yourself of this pernicious old wives tale. Then his "Better angels of our nature" should fix you right up with a more accurate and informed view of the world and society we live in.