I don’t think you understand that the money doesn’t magically appear. It comes from taxes which come from taxpayers. All “universal basic income” is is another term for “income transfer”.
I agree with your comment that population growth needs to be addressed along with a guaranteed basic income.
Great notions. I’d add that “wealth creation”, when taken out of the rhetorical wiggly fingered power hierarchy, IS de facto creation of a defined (by fealty to a tightly controlled solipsistic circular reasoning system) class that DOES live in universally (policy) guaranteed income. It is a bludgeon of stunning stupidity and sociopathological devolutionary premise that 99% must be made to suffer FOR AN IDEA!
Kunstler’s wrong about one thing, Walmart gets billions in public subsidies.
"Walmart and the Walton family benefit from tax breaks and taxpayer subsidies estimated at more than $7.8 billion a year, according to a new report."MSNBC.com.
And indirectly. What are TANF and SNAP except the government saying, “Don’t worry, Wal-Mart. Just go ahead and underpay your workers, and the taxpayers will make up the difference.”?
[quote=“Space_cadet, post:17, topic:44038”]
“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.”
[/quote] I was arguing that for a significant percentage of human beings, the ability to pay the rent and eat enough food is not enough. Humans want to increase their consumption especially if others have more than them or have things that they want. This to me is basic human nature which UBI doesn’t seem to address.
However, I am not saying there are no benefits of UBI especially in helping alleviate poverty and all that comes with it as you wrote. There certainly appear to be benefits from the UBI concept. But it seems there are really two issues to address: poverty and materialism… and UBI addresses the first one. If this concept will convince people they don’t need that shiny new SUV or 5 bedroom house or exotic tropical vacation (all high carbon consuming items), then I may be convinced that it will solve the scourge of materialism.
Thanks for the link. I’ve done similar in engineering classes that I’ve taught. There is a small group of engineers with similar perspectives who formed a group called Engineers for Social Justice.
However, many academics will not touch topics such as these given that academics need to engage in research, and given that research requires funding, and given that most institutions with money will not fund research that looks into this.
Unless the UBI is the only source of income for all people and capitalism eliminated, wealth concentration, plutocracy, and unsustainable practices will continue.
What you say is true, but with UBI think of the possibilities. Without having to work like a dog for slave wages, people will be freed up to solve some of the problems you and others bring up. You could start a business if you wanted, without worrying where you’re rent and food will come from if it failed or took longer to be successful.
The corp.'s won’t buy into it until their profits drop, but at the rate were losing jobs, it won’t be long until they embrace it.
Yes! and that is why all nations/civilization have crumbled when inequality got to such wicked heights of royals and serfs.
The Utopian Future could be UBI and Direct Democracy by Blockchain.
This poor guy thinks money is a “thing”, and that it’s use is a zero-sum game: what you get I lose. Once someone swallows that story, further communication is unlikely to be productive.
Why would they give their money away? They can choose to keep the money in the family, grant money to causes etc. As long as they are not stealing or deliberately polluting the environment like Dump.
Who’s going to pay for this, and what generation will support policies like social security, and medicare if not enough people are working? The reason policies worked in the 1950s and 1960s as long as someone was middle class and above was because previous , present, and future generations had that notion of having a job from cradle to grave. And there were pensions without the fears so much of offshoring jobs, accounts etc. As I said though who will pay for this? As it is there are some people who have never worked but still manage to get benefits.
I agree- just because someone else has money does not necessarily mean that someone else loses it. However, there are CEOS making 400 times what the workers make.
I doubt that enough people will embrace this. Hey, the rethugs don’t even like social security for retirees!
Not all humans embrace the notion of “MORE” - it’s just that basics like housing, food, utilities have gotten so expensive. Most people do not spend their paychecks on a tropical vacation.
While it sounds "dreamy let’s think about this: Would most people who work very hard want to support those who sit at home all day and eat crackers? I think not!
Good point.- so consumers help to increase Wally world profits and pay a substantial amount of benefits for their workers as well!