6 ms·

And? that's what "rolling out" is about, to test and gradually use the scheme if it works

by oulipo2 8mo ago

its_magic 8mo ago
[flagged]
- philipwhiuk 8mo ago
  > robbery: the action of taking property unlawfully from a person or place by force or threat of force. The language of Shakespeare and Seuss deserves better than this mindlessness. It is not robbery because it is not unlawful.
  - its_magic 8mo ago
    In fact theft is always unlawful, no matter what alternate name you give it or how many of your fellow thieves and vampires approve of the crime.
- baseballdork 8mo ago
  This is such a bad faith argument. Society has largely agreed that welfare is a valuable thing to do, from disability to social security. Calling taxation theft just says that you aren't able to be rational about this.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 8mo ago
    > Calling taxation theft From reading their comments here, it seems to me that they are saying the theft occurs when labor is sold for a pittance in foreign markets so that things produced by said labor can be sold at a lower price (as compared to when more expensive labor is hired) in domestic markets. ("Basic income" = other people work as slaves in a factory somewhere so you can sit at home and "discover yourself.") The UBI would logically be an extension of that whereby the UBI program itself can only be funded by this disparity and therefore any beneficiary of such a program must be participating, however indirectly, in that theft. (Perhaps especially if one is a loud proponent of such a program.) Ostensibly, from this perspective, one might consider whether the laborers should benefit more from their labor, rather than the consumers of products which are produced by said labor. It doesn't seem a particularly disagreeable or irrational perspective, at least on its face, though the seemingly disparaging mention of Marxism looks out of place given this perspective is rather Marxist. Of course, whether one refers to that as "theft" is up to them; I'm just offering this alternate perspective since I didn't read it the way the parent did.
    - baseballdork 8mo ago
      Not sure how you reconcile this take with "People don't like being robbed, PERIOD, especially not to pay for a bunch of weed smokers to sit at home relaxing on their dime. There will be blood." This person doesn't like taxation. Tough.
      - its_magic 8mo ago
        Jesus Christ didn't like taxation either. He preached that it was theft also. That's one big reason why they murdered him, then sent Paul (aka Saul) along to invent a new 'explanation' of the Parable of the Coin more favorable to the Roman viewpoint. Regardless of whatever pretense you put on, you are in fact a member of a gang of thieves plotting to rob your next victim, just as Lysander Spooner explained in the 1800s: "If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can (and will) hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists." - Lysander Spooner "If taxation without consent is robbery, the United States government has never had, has not now, and is never likely to have, an honest dollar in its treasury. If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized." - Lysander Spooner "The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents -- men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest -- stand ready at all times to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved." - Lysander Spooner "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." - Lysander Spooner Hint: We are now in the "raising of the spirits of the dead" phase of prophecy; the above being an example of what is meant by that phrase. You Are Here.
        baseballdork 8mo ago
- ekidd 8mo ago
  > What is it about robbing one group of people to pay another that you would expect to "work"? Well, let's say we get one or two more breakthroughs in AI, and it succeeds in automating literally every job that can be done at a computer. And then it starts investing heavily in robotics. This would render human labor as uncompetitive as horse labor is today. At this point, you have two basic scenarios: something like UBI, or (if the machines are less cooperative) John Conner. This actually seems at least as likely these days as a warmed over libertarian argument that, "Taxes are really just slavery!"
  - Schmerika 8mo ago
    > At this point, you have two basic scenarios: something like UBI, or (if the machines are less cooperative) John Conner. Well, there is a third basic scenario; where the billionaires who control the AI use it to help get rid of all the poors once they're no longer necessary. If that were true though, we'd probably see them all frantically scrambling to control AI, buying private islands and blackmail networks, getting heavily involved in pandemic preparedness programs, genetic engineering, virus research, instigating massive wars, buying up all the media and politicians, creating massive surveillance programs and building deep underground bunkers. Stuff like that. So, nothing to worry about.
Legend2440 8mo ago
The trouble is that paying a few people to not work is very very different from paying everyone to not work. We need people to work to produce the things they need to live. As long as this remains true, UBI can never happen. This fantasy of being able to live without working is out of touch with the cold hard reality.
- _DeadFred_ 8mo ago
  The problem is soon (and to some extent currently) there won't be enough work for everyone, and there definitely won't be enough to support them at a historical lifestyle level. I guess those people continuing to live (or live semi-well) would be fantasy to you. I'm not sure where society will go at that point. The western world has sold a 'we are improving your life' story to get buy in from the masses. What do you propose? Other options used in the past were typically state provided bread and circuses and/or waging war.
  - Legend2440 8mo ago
    Your entire idea of economics is backwards. There is more than enough work for everyone right now, and (outside of recessions) we will not run out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy As more and more work is automated, the lifestyle level increases rather than decreases. Automation lets you produce more with the same amount of labor, increasing productivity and raising the standard of living. This is the sole reason we're not subsistence farmers right now. War does not help the masses; it is purely destructive and one of the worst things you can do for the economy in the long run.
    - _DeadFred_ 8mo ago
      And yet my kids standard of living is worse. Their optimism about their employment is worse. I never used to know people working multiple very menial part time jobs to survive other than people restarting their lives. When I was young people working second jobs were saving money for a vacation or using them to pay for a fancy car, not as part of their basic budget/means of earning an income. "Ray Dalio says America is developing a ‘dependency’ on the top 1% of workers, while the bottom 60% are struggling and unproductive" https://fortune.com/2025/10/27/ray-dalio-america-dependeny-top-workers-industries-fortune-global-forum/ https://fortune.com/2025/10/27/ray-dalio-america-dependeny-t... "Millions of Americans Are Becoming Economically Invisible " https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45374779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45374779 War is unproductive and a destructive use of resources but that doesn't change that it has historically be an outlet for unused labor. My point was that if we don't approach things intelligently/intentionally we can end up with crappy unwanted/unintentional outcomes.

And? that's what "rolling out" is about, to test and gradually use the scheme if it works

by oulipo2 8mo ago

And? that's what "rolling out" is about, to test and gradually use the scheme if it works

its_magic 8mo ago

[flagged]

philipwhiuk 8mo ago
> robbery: the action of taking property unlawfully from a person or place by force or threat of force. The language of Shakespeare and Seuss deserves better than this mindlessness. It is not robbery because it is not unlawful.
- its_magic 8mo ago
  In fact theft is always unlawful, no matter what alternate name you give it or how many of your fellow thieves and vampires approve of the crime.
baseballdork 8mo ago
This is such a bad faith argument. Society has largely agreed that welfare is a valuable thing to do, from disability to social security. Calling taxation theft just says that you aren't able to be rational about this.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 8mo ago
  > Calling taxation theft From reading their comments here, it seems to me that they are saying the theft occurs when labor is sold for a pittance in foreign markets so that things produced by said labor can be sold at a lower price (as compared to when more expensive labor is hired) in domestic markets. ("Basic income" = other people work as slaves in a factory somewhere so you can sit at home and "discover yourself.") The UBI would logically be an extension of that whereby the UBI program itself can only be funded by this disparity and therefore any beneficiary of such a program must be participating, however indirectly, in that theft. (Perhaps especially if one is a loud proponent of such a program.) Ostensibly, from this perspective, one might consider whether the laborers should benefit more from their labor, rather than the consumers of products which are produced by said labor. It doesn't seem a particularly disagreeable or irrational perspective, at least on its face, though the seemingly disparaging mention of Marxism looks out of place given this perspective is rather Marxist. Of course, whether one refers to that as "theft" is up to them; I'm just offering this alternate perspective since I didn't read it the way the parent did.
  - baseballdork 8mo ago
    Not sure how you reconcile this take with "People don't like being robbed, PERIOD, especially not to pay for a bunch of weed smokers to sit at home relaxing on their dime. There will be blood." This person doesn't like taxation. Tough.
    - its_magic 8mo ago
      Jesus Christ didn't like taxation either. He preached that it was theft also. That's one big reason why they murdered him, then sent Paul (aka Saul) along to invent a new 'explanation' of the Parable of the Coin more favorable to the Roman viewpoint. Regardless of whatever pretense you put on, you are in fact a member of a gang of thieves plotting to rob your next victim, just as Lysander Spooner explained in the 1800s: "If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can (and will) hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists." - Lysander Spooner "If taxation without consent is robbery, the United States government has never had, has not now, and is never likely to have, an honest dollar in its treasury. If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized." - Lysander Spooner "The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents -- men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest -- stand ready at all times to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved." - Lysander Spooner "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." - Lysander Spooner Hint: We are now in the "raising of the spirits of the dead" phase of prophecy; the above being an example of what is meant by that phrase. You Are Here.
      - baseballdork 8mo ago
ekidd 8mo ago
> What is it about robbing one group of people to pay another that you would expect to "work"? Well, let's say we get one or two more breakthroughs in AI, and it succeeds in automating literally every job that can be done at a computer. And then it starts investing heavily in robotics. This would render human labor as uncompetitive as horse labor is today. At this point, you have two basic scenarios: something like UBI, or (if the machines are less cooperative) John Conner. This actually seems at least as likely these days as a warmed over libertarian argument that, "Taxes are really just slavery!"
- Schmerika 8mo ago
  > At this point, you have two basic scenarios: something like UBI, or (if the machines are less cooperative) John Conner. Well, there is a third basic scenario; where the billionaires who control the AI use it to help get rid of all the poors once they're no longer necessary. If that were true though, we'd probably see them all frantically scrambling to control AI, buying private islands and blackmail networks, getting heavily involved in pandemic preparedness programs, genetic engineering, virus research, instigating massive wars, buying up all the media and politicians, creating massive surveillance programs and building deep underground bunkers. Stuff like that. So, nothing to worry about.

Legend2440 8mo ago

The trouble is that paying a few people to not work is very very different from paying everyone to not work. We need people to work to produce the things they need to live. As long as this remains true, UBI can never happen. This fantasy of being able to live without working is out of touch with the cold hard reality.

_DeadFred_ 8mo ago
The problem is soon (and to some extent currently) there won't be enough work for everyone, and there definitely won't be enough to support them at a historical lifestyle level. I guess those people continuing to live (or live semi-well) would be fantasy to you. I'm not sure where society will go at that point. The western world has sold a 'we are improving your life' story to get buy in from the masses. What do you propose? Other options used in the past were typically state provided bread and circuses and/or waging war.
- Legend2440 8mo ago
  Your entire idea of economics is backwards. There is more than enough work for everyone right now, and (outside of recessions) we will not run out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy As more and more work is automated, the lifestyle level increases rather than decreases. Automation lets you produce more with the same amount of labor, increasing productivity and raising the standard of living. This is the sole reason we're not subsistence farmers right now. War does not help the masses; it is purely destructive and one of the worst things you can do for the economy in the long run.
  - _DeadFred_ 8mo ago
    And yet my kids standard of living is worse. Their optimism about their employment is worse. I never used to know people working multiple very menial part time jobs to survive other than people restarting their lives. When I was young people working second jobs were saving money for a vacation or using them to pay for a fancy car, not as part of their basic budget/means of earning an income. "Ray Dalio says America is developing a ‘dependency’ on the top 1% of workers, while the bottom 60% are struggling and unproductive" https://fortune.com/2025/10/27/ray-dalio-america-dependeny-top-workers-industries-fortune-global-forum/ https://fortune.com/2025/10/27/ray-dalio-america-dependeny-t... "Millions of Americans Are Becoming Economically Invisible " https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45374779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45374779 War is unproductive and a destructive use of resources but that doesn't change that it has historically be an outlet for unused labor. My point was that if we don't approach things intelligently/intentionally we can end up with crappy unwanted/unintentional outcomes.