4 ms·
I do not think that a life on basic income would have been appealing to the author Basic income isn't supposed to be your only source of income. Rather, it's i
by andor 13y ago
I do not think that a life on basic income would have been appealing to the author
Basic income isn't supposed to be your only source of income. Rather, it's income you can take for granted and that therefore gives you some financial security to do riskier or financially less rewarding (e.g. social) work.
- 1123581321 13y agoIt seems there are two definitions. The person to which I responded said: "free to go live in some cheap cost of living area while just doing their thing and contributing to the commons in the form of open source or taking what they eventually create and marketing it (if it is marketable when complete) in order to generate wealth on top of their basic income." To me that sounds as though basic income would be all of the income with only a possibility of income from the work eventually. If basic income is only supposed to supplement a person's income, then EITC already does this in the United States and might only need an adjustment to be based on contractor and royalty income, not just earned income. Your definition is so close to EITC that it makes sense for the more ambitious definition to be the one with its own name and political movement.