8 ms·

We have had a sort of UBI with the pandemic and a sizable portion of people have chosen not to work. I think if you have healthcare, your rent paid for, and fre

We have had a sort of UBI with the pandemic and a sizable portion of people have chosen not to work. I think if you have healthcare, your rent paid for, and free food then there could be 15 to 30% of the population that will just watch Netflix and hang out all day. It’s enough to erode support for the entire program.

giantg2 5y ago
I think the number of people that would FIRE would grow exponentially. I know I would if I had healthcare and enough income for all the basics ($1000 per month).
- seibelj 5y ago
  FIRE is financial independence. It implies you worked hard, scrimped, and lived frugally to earn an early retirement. Getting free everything is not FIRE. It’s reliance on the welfare to eliminate any requirement of productivity. I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing, I’m just stating what it is.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    But people who FIRE today do depend on things that are publically funded. If you read blogs about it, people talk of free library programs, subsidized public transit, tax credits where you get more back than you paid in - net profit, etc. I didn't include Social Security or Medicare since they are supposed to be single payer systems, yet the way they are funded today doesn't exactly jive with that. All I'm saying is that they would FIRE sooner with the extra income.
    - seibelj 5y ago
      You are right but IMO the difference is that the government is enabling people to “retire” without ever working a day in their life. If you have enough money for food, shelter, and free healthcare from cradle to grave with zero requirement of ever working a single day in your life, I think society will change.
- b9a2cab5 5y ago
  "FIRE" is more accurately described here as not being a productive member of society, which is fine if you've contributed your fair share for 20 years, but not so fine if you're 22 and just out of college. Somehow I doubt that these people are going to use their free time to get education. Without the pressure of parents/society to get good grades (i.e., achieve mastery of the content, although I recognize in some schools classes are poorly taught and tests don't reflect mastery) most college students would cruise through their classes - just talk to any student who took classes P/NP this past year.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    "which is fine if you've contributed your fair share for 20 years" I wonder what defines fair share. It seems that one could inherit, win, or take advantage of others to accumulate enough wealth to FIRE just as often (maybe even more so) than people who actually earned it by working. I say working because making it through capital ownership without participation doesn't seem like earning it in a way that is beneficial to society. In the end, I don't believe that people who FIRE actually worked so much more and provided so much more for society than those who do not. Many socially beneficial jobs pay the least (teacher, social worker, etc).
    - AlexTWithBeard 5y ago
      A "fair share" simply means that you have contributed to the society more than you got back. Money is not an absolutely perfect way measure this contribution, but all other measures are even worse.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        Considering the national debt, most people would not meet your definition since we are all using these services that have not been paid for, right?
        AlexTWithBeard 5y ago
        Right. Most people would not meet this definition.

giantg2 5y ago

I think the number of people that would FIRE would grow exponentially. I know I would if I had healthcare and enough income for all the basics ($1000 per month).

seibelj 5y ago
FIRE is financial independence. It implies you worked hard, scrimped, and lived frugally to earn an early retirement. Getting free everything is not FIRE. It’s reliance on the welfare to eliminate any requirement of productivity. I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing, I’m just stating what it is.
- giantg2 5y ago
  But people who FIRE today do depend on things that are publically funded. If you read blogs about it, people talk of free library programs, subsidized public transit, tax credits where you get more back than you paid in - net profit, etc. I didn't include Social Security or Medicare since they are supposed to be single payer systems, yet the way they are funded today doesn't exactly jive with that. All I'm saying is that they would FIRE sooner with the extra income.
  - seibelj 5y ago
    You are right but IMO the difference is that the government is enabling people to “retire” without ever working a day in their life. If you have enough money for food, shelter, and free healthcare from cradle to grave with zero requirement of ever working a single day in your life, I think society will change.
b9a2cab5 5y ago
"FIRE" is more accurately described here as not being a productive member of society, which is fine if you've contributed your fair share for 20 years, but not so fine if you're 22 and just out of college. Somehow I doubt that these people are going to use their free time to get education. Without the pressure of parents/society to get good grades (i.e., achieve mastery of the content, although I recognize in some schools classes are poorly taught and tests don't reflect mastery) most college students would cruise through their classes - just talk to any student who took classes P/NP this past year.
- giantg2 5y ago
  "which is fine if you've contributed your fair share for 20 years" I wonder what defines fair share. It seems that one could inherit, win, or take advantage of others to accumulate enough wealth to FIRE just as often (maybe even more so) than people who actually earned it by working. I say working because making it through capital ownership without participation doesn't seem like earning it in a way that is beneficial to society. In the end, I don't believe that people who FIRE actually worked so much more and provided so much more for society than those who do not. Many socially beneficial jobs pay the least (teacher, social worker, etc).
  - AlexTWithBeard 5y ago
    A "fair share" simply means that you have contributed to the society more than you got back. Money is not an absolutely perfect way measure this contribution, but all other measures are even worse.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      Considering the national debt, most people would not meet your definition since we are all using these services that have not been paid for, right?
      - AlexTWithBeard 5y ago
        Right. Most people would not meet this definition.