Home | About | Donate

Universal Basic Income Needed to Break 'Addiction to Economic Growth Killing Us'


Universal Basic Income Needed to Break 'Addiction to Economic Growth Killing Us'

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

As some tech giants throw their weight behind the idea of a universal basic income, one anthropologist says it's a key component of a strategy to break the "addiction to economic growth [that] is killing us" and the planet.


But not a word about the population growth underlying the rest. Taboo subject.

However, UBI is an idea whose time has come:


If these hypocrites are so enamored of Universal Basic Income, let them give away all their wealth. Not pledging to do so when they die, but NOW.

Somehow the notion of billionaires saying someone else should give people free money just makes me want to vomit.


You realize you would get a basic income as well.


So how is this going to be paid for continually? They are coming for our basic so called entitlements that we pay into and then actual benefits for struggling families, children will also be on the chopping block with republicans.

We can’t even get Medicare For All??

Do you really think Sinclair Broadcasting, Brietbart, Fox so called news are going to give fair and balance reporting.


I don’t think it’s the billionaires saying it. They’re happy to have everyone work to death for $7/hr in whatever enterprise they own.
I think you don’t understand the concept.


The One percenter’s have pushed the middle class over the edge of the financial cliff. If the rich folks don’t start realizing that their ‘customer base’ is truly withering, their system will not continue to ‘work’ for them either. the 99 percent folks have to be able to buy the goods that the billionaires make and no amount of advertising (propaganda, or whatever you call it) is going to sell goods when we don’t have the funds. What goes around ALWAYS HAS to come around or nobody goes ahead in this world of limited resources, that by the we are coming close to the end(s) of. We’ll be running out of fresh water, coming right up.


good luck. this will require revolution to obtain. at least in the US.


All the more reason it’s a bad idea. I don’t need it, and why should I take other people’s money when I don’t need it?

And I also realize that I would probably pay more in additional taxes than I would receive. If you anticipate paying a BAI of any meaningful amount, it means a massive increase in taxes, or a dramatic cut in other spending.


I fully understand the concept. Billionaire tech moguls are more than happy to suggest that the government take everyone else’s money to pay for BAI, while they’re not willing to pay for their own ideas. Zuck and Musk aren’t saying “Oh, I’ll contribute my billions to fund this”, they’re saying “tax everyone to fund this”.

As I said, hypocrites more than happy to spend other people’s money.


I think many already know intuitively that our population and economies are not sustainable or equitable. Capitalism is at the core of our problems since it promotes greed and over consumption in the search for profits. It does not promote sustainability or equitable wealth distribution.

Here is an interesting video related to the subject.


I don’t think you understand the idea of a universal basic income. You will get it too and it is not a ‘gift’ from the very wealthy. (they will get it too!) This will allow all of us to do the work we think is important and still be able to pay your bills. You can work at a job you like and not worry that you will not be able to live a good life.


the most important issue for our times is how do you break the power of big business and their collusion with government


While not having reading all of the fine print I still don’t see how a UBI will slow the destruction of the Earth. People’s desires and greed will still be around. Free income will not rid the world of these afflictions. The current capitalist model is too entrenched within the mindsets of most people on the planet to change very soon. Perhaps, a utopia where UBI along with rationing of high carbon consuming activities will evolve in several centuries after humans experience many environmental tribulations and collectively let go of their materialism. Until then, the “I want my shiny new fill in the blank” attitude rules humankind.


Note that universality requires a global change, and that currently only single state welfare distribution schemes are considered

The demand for economic growth is strong because there simply isn’t enough money in the world

The problems are associated with the creation of money

If we democratize the creation of money by allowing each to claim a Share of standardized global fiat credit, for deposit in trust with their bank, as part of an actual social contract, in exchange for a pledge of cooperation…

…require all sovereign debt to be backed with these Shares…

…each will then receive an equal share of the interest paid on global sovereign debt as a basic income…

…each bank holding Shares in trust will have a surplus of sustainably priced credit for investment by local fiduciaries and actuaries exclusively in secure sovereign debt…

…each level of each government will have access to sustainably priced credit for whatever projects are approved by local fiduciaries and actuaries and can attract willing labor

Access to sustainably priced credit is far more valuable than a welfare distribution

This change requires the adoption of one rule for international banking, without functionally changing anything else, but provides each adult human on the planet with a structural connection to each other, as sovereign owners of our shared global economic system

thanks for your kind indulgence… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tralfamadoran777


You are correct about not a word being mentioned about population growth, but a universal income would actually reduce population as the empowerment of all women would allow them to make choices about giving birth as well as reducing the dependency on having children for their future economic security. It is sort of UBI 101 along with reducing warfare (how many people would join the military if everyone had economic security?), decreasing racism, sexism, illiteracy and a host of other benefits.
The primary obstacle to UBI is actually the ingrained myth that if no one had to work to receive income, then no one would work. Even though corporate America is dead set against anything that cuts into their profits, those same corporations understand how brainwashed the average consumer is.


The concept of universal basic income is not to increase profits for corporations who depend on voracious consumers, but rather to alleviate economic insecurity. For everyone to have the ability to pay their rent and eat enough food, doesn’t necessarily mean that we have to increase our consumption of everything. But by freeing ourselves from work (and perhaps slavery), we can then engage in serious discussions on how to proceed forward as a species. Instead our worlds revolve around the need to earn money 24/7 giving us very little time if any to seriously understand what we must collectively do to save us and our planet from the next planetary mass extinction.
Experiments in the past have shown wonderful results for the societies that participated in a UBI program in places such as Canada, Switzerland and Finland. At one point even Richard Nixon wanted UBI to be his greatest legacy until a manipulative aide presented false evidence to the contrary and convinced the President that it would have profoundly negative consequences. There are many books on the subject and you may be pleasantly surprised at just how much time and thought has been put into this very progressive concept.


Excellent reply. I agree SC


They will have no choice but to do something like if they don’t want to deal with billions of people becoming homeless and in a condition of widespread extreme food insecurity (aka starvation famine) as automated robotics takes over more jobs. Kurt Vonnegut dealt with this issue in one of his early novels “God Bless You Mister Rosewater” which asked the question “What are people for?”

More recently, James Howard Kunstler in a recent blog entry wrote that people would be well advised to “shift your energies into a trade or vocation that makes you useful to other people. This probably precludes jobs like developing phone apps, day-trading, and teaching gender studies. Think: carpentry, blacksmithing, basic medicine, mule-breeding, simplified small retail, and especially farming, … . The entire digital economy is going to fade away like a drug-induced hallucination, so beware the current narcissistic blandishments of computer technology. Keep in mind that being in this world actually entitles you to nothing. One way or another, you’ll have to earn everything worth having, including self-respect and your next meal.”

Kunstler who wrote the book “The Long Emergency” published in 2005 that introduced the concept of “peak oil” – the point that we have reached though financialist scams are holding back the debt deluge that has begun and will be coming on hard and strong very very soon. His 2012 book “Too Much Magic” takes the conceptualization further.

Another Kunstler quote from the most recent blog entry:
“Everything organized at the giant scale is going to fail. We have made all the systems of daily life too large and they will not function in the long emergency . . . an age characterized by universal contraction. This is true of corporations, institutions, schools, hospitals, farms, governments, virtually all organized enterprise. Retail is currently just the most visible example at the moment, since it is a commercial battleground that doesn’t enjoy public subsidies. The organisms on that field are exquisitely sensitive to economic reality, and the salient reality these days is the impoverishment of their customers, the former middle class.”


I think universal basic income is great as an idea. Here are my concerns:

  1. it could increase population growth. Some people enjoy having kids, like me for instance, and my mom. We each had three and thought about more. We both were well educated, able to earn good money. A large number of people stop family size to put food on the table, or because their work takes up to much time, as well. I don’t think it would reduce population growth.

  2. I think it is something that needs to be approached gradually. With lots of discussion. Universal health care is a good start. Universal housing, perhaps, next?

  3. If schools are free and that means supplies and fees included, health care is free and that includes all meds, minimal food, housing is available at no cost,
    what else is needed? Free basic transportation?
    I would favor making essentials like schools, housing, public transit free.

  4. I believe that restraints on urban sprawl, unrecyclable goods, fossil fuels, addictive drugs–things that hurt society and the environment must become more controlled substances. For all income levels and corporations.

So, I think the way money is spent is as big a problem as who spends it or how much they have.