4 ms·

The old pound isn't going anywhere? And maybe (dont kill me for this) some people need an adult in the room on occasions. Maybe (again, hold yourself back) mo

The old pound isn't going anywhere? And maybe (dont kill me for this) some people need an adult in the room on occasions. Maybe (again, hold yourself back) money given by the state should be spent in supermarkets, not on disco biscuits. A degree of control over that doesn't sound bad at all.

_glsb 4y ago
the only thing the negative voting on this comment shows is the utter lack of understanding of econ or governance topics by HN commenters.
- swarnie 4y ago
  Its not a problem, i understand we are a very small bubble which doesn't reflect society as a whole.
  - jevgeni 4y ago
    True, but the anti-intellectual arrogance of HN for a few select topics, like for example, people downvoting your comments, is irritating.
no_time 4y ago
>And maybe (dont kill me for this) some people need an adult in the room on occasions. To some extent I agree. The problem is that historically the limit of this state control was technology itself. Except now we are far too advanced to keep technology as this limit. Money given by the state is an entirely different thing. If you need the state's money, you are ought to play by it's rules. What I'm worried about is the state meddling with personal financials with pinpoint accuracy.
gilleain 4y ago
(For those unaware, 'disco biscuits' is slang for Ecstasy pills, I believe). Sure, so it seems reasonable to prevent people spending benefits on drugs. However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? I can imagine some 'luxury money' that can be spent on anything and 'basic money' that you can't use to buy a pack of crisps or a bar of chocolate, only carrots and apples...
- no_time 4y ago
  >I can imagine some 'luxury money' that can be spent on anything and 'basic money' that you can't use to buy a pack of crisps or a bar of chocolate, only carrots and apples... This becoming a reality in my lifetime would convince me that time is a circle. My country had "dollar shops" before my time, where you could buy western luxury goods with foreign currency. Which was basically unobtainable for the average citizen. https://bav-art.hu/blog/hello-tourist-dollarboltok-a-szocialista-magyarorszagon/ https://bav-art.hu/blog/hello-tourist-dollarboltok-a-szocial...
- swarnie 4y ago
  > However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? Would that be such a bad thing.....? Again statistics would say people can't help themselves in that department.
  - gilleain 4y ago
    Ok, and then it goes to alcohol, sugar, meat, and fuel as items that people can't help themselves to stop buying? I mean, this is what consumption taxes do. A tax on sugar makes it more expensive to buy a sweet drink, so you can buy less of them for the same money. By putting it into the programming of the money, you make the control more precise - you can only buy 1 sugary drink a day, for example.
    - InCityDreams 4y ago
      What if someone is doing exercise/ heavy work and need more sugar, for example?
      - gilleain 4y ago
        Sure, that's one flaw in the (dystopian) plan. I'm sure there are many others. I guess the horrible bureucratic solution would be to get a 'sugar license' or similar. To be clear, this would be a nightmare, I think!
    - 4y ago
harvey9 4y ago
We already have technology for that. UK Gov gave a contract to Sodexho ages ago that limited what the user was allowed to buy. Not sure if its still in use - one problem was limited number of retailers who accepted the card.
starkd 4y ago
And just who is going to set the rules where money given by the state can be spent? That is suggestive of a literal nanny state, and government dictats always introduce a certain arbitrariness on the level of individuals. The government cannot save us from ourselves, but given enough power, it will always try.
krupan 4y ago
If we want that much state involvement then the state can just give people food directly instead of money that could be spent on anything.

_glsb 4y ago

the only thing the negative voting on this comment shows is the utter lack of understanding of econ or governance topics by HN commenters.

swarnie 4y ago
Its not a problem, i understand we are a very small bubble which doesn't reflect society as a whole.
- jevgeni 4y ago
  True, but the anti-intellectual arrogance of HN for a few select topics, like for example, people downvoting your comments, is irritating.

no_time 4y ago

>And maybe (dont kill me for this) some people need an adult in the room on occasions. To some extent I agree. The problem is that historically the limit of this state control was technology itself. Except now we are far too advanced to keep technology as this limit. Money given by the state is an entirely different thing. If you need the state's money, you are ought to play by it's rules. What I'm worried about is the state meddling with personal financials with pinpoint accuracy.

gilleain 4y ago

(For those unaware, 'disco biscuits' is slang for Ecstasy pills, I believe). Sure, so it seems reasonable to prevent people spending benefits on drugs. However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? I can imagine some 'luxury money' that can be spent on anything and 'basic money' that you can't use to buy a pack of crisps or a bar of chocolate, only carrots and apples...

no_time 4y ago
>I can imagine some 'luxury money' that can be spent on anything and 'basic money' that you can't use to buy a pack of crisps or a bar of chocolate, only carrots and apples... This becoming a reality in my lifetime would convince me that time is a circle. My country had "dollar shops" before my time, where you could buy western luxury goods with foreign currency. Which was basically unobtainable for the average citizen. https://bav-art.hu/blog/hello-tourist-dollarboltok-a-szocialista-magyarorszagon/ https://bav-art.hu/blog/hello-tourist-dollarboltok-a-szocial...
swarnie 4y ago
> However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? Would that be such a bad thing.....? Again statistics would say people can't help themselves in that department.
- gilleain 4y ago
  Ok, and then it goes to alcohol, sugar, meat, and fuel as items that people can't help themselves to stop buying? I mean, this is what consumption taxes do. A tax on sugar makes it more expensive to buy a sweet drink, so you can buy less of them for the same money. By putting it into the programming of the money, you make the control more precise - you can only buy 1 sugary drink a day, for example.
  - InCityDreams 4y ago
    What if someone is doing exercise/ heavy work and need more sugar, for example?
    - gilleain 4y ago
      Sure, that's one flaw in the (dystopian) plan. I'm sure there are many others. I guess the horrible bureucratic solution would be to get a 'sugar license' or similar. To be clear, this would be a nightmare, I think!
  - 4y ago

harvey9 4y ago

We already have technology for that. UK Gov gave a contract to Sodexho ages ago that limited what the user was allowed to buy. Not sure if its still in use - one problem was limited number of retailers who accepted the card.

starkd 4y ago

And just who is going to set the rules where money given by the state can be spent? That is suggestive of a literal nanny state, and government dictats always introduce a certain arbitrariness on the level of individuals. The government cannot save us from ourselves, but given enough power, it will always try.

krupan 4y ago

If we want that much state involvement then the state can just give people food directly instead of money that could be spent on anything.