You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why bother with circle jerks?
I see your concerns, I still think UBI can be a good instrument if used correctly, tho. As you said inflation is always happening, so my approach would be to negate some of the resulting pressure.
It would also be perfect in my Utopia, because I just dont see how we have to create working places out of thin air, just for the sake of letting people work.
I see the need for people to be able to survive. This is clear. Though I also do not believe someone needs to survive if they put forth ZERO effort. I am not saying those who look for work, or try to be creative and don't succeed. Those are the people that need help. I don't see the world as being benefited by people who choose to do nothing and just live off of the UBI.
I do however, like the old saying:
We may not be able to have jobs in the traditional sense. Yet we may have other ways a person can be of value.
Doing nothing and collecting UBI has no value IMO. In fact, it can be like a plague. People see it, wonder "Why am I working, when you just sit on your ass, I want to sit on my ass too" This does happen. There are people like me that would never be content doing nothing.
I've been asked what I think of immortality. I've stated as long as I still have ideas to create, and projects to complete then I have a reason to want to live. Without those things why bother?
sry, I had to go to sleep.
I think every person strives to provide value to society. Sure you can party for one year straight, but nobody would just get drugged up for 10 years and be content with it.
I thought you would think the same in that aspect, you are a believer in voluntaryism after all.
Being a believer in voluntaryism does not mean I agree with other people being forced to pay to support someone who does not wish to contribute.
We actually have people like that in the U.S. now that leech off of the welfare system. They are likely a low % of the population, but they do exist.
I don't believe I should be forced to pay for anyone else.
Why do I bring this up? The government doesn't have the ability to produce anything for free. So someone is going to have to pay to provide a UBI. It'd likely be people a lot wealthier than I am.
It could be done another way which would require a complete change in the way the world, money, etc work. It'd be like hitting a reset button. So those in power and the billionaires calling for UBI certainly would not endorse that.
This means that UBI is either going to be redistributionary or DEBT based. If it is DEBT based that will steadily devalue the currency and the UBI will need to be frequently increased accelerating the devaluing process.
Well, even tho Zuckerberg brought it up, I really dont care about him. He might be force to reckon with, with the biggest social medium under his control. But I dont think an idea should be judged on who advocates it ;).
'The people in power care about themselves and will never do something good for the common folk' - that can kill any political idea, I will have. The only solution to this is anarchy. And even your concept of voluntaryism would crumble under the idea of inherently evil people.
Im not saying your argument is wrong. Historically all evil is rooted in a positive idea that got abused. Im just saying that you should not stop trying to make the world a better place, just because it failed often in the past.
When determining how to pay for it matters.
Elon Musk and Bill Gates I think both endorsed it as well. I didn't even think of Zuckerberg.
Oh, didnt even know about Gates and Musk ^^. Well you should always be careful if something sounds to good to be true. I will make a post about UBI soon. I saw you also got 3 new posts I havent read.
Gotta do some stuff irl, right now, but its good to see we finally got an idea we disagree on :D
I don't disagree on the premise of UBI. Based on many cases of historical precedence I can see what is likely to happen with it due to government and market activity. I also don't believe in the government giving anything for FREE so that leaves me wondering where is this UBI going to come from, who is going to pay for it? If no one is and they are just adding more to the money supply then that devalues the currency and history has shown inflation will compensate and soon UBI will not be enough and they'll have to keep raising it. If money is backed by something it doesn't inflate. When it is fiat and you keep dumping more into the system it does.
So I don't disagree that UBI sounds good. I just don't see how it can actually work. I foresee likely events based upon plenty of past examples.
So if they can explain where it comes from, how it won't cause inflation and thus and endless cycle of continually having to increase the UBI, and how the government will not impose new fees, taxes, etc that simply consume all of that UBI effectively making it as how it was not there. If those things can be explained away in some rational way other than the idea just sounding compassionate and good then I'd support it.
Right now it all seems to be based purely on people believing it is compassionate and good.
Well there are many models to gain the money needed, one of the most popular is the taxation model that I used for my calculation above. Other popular ones are more local (based on citizenship) and others are ressource based like alaska. I never claimed the state can give out money for free, I dont know why you are arguing against something that i never said nor implied.
The UBI is on all cases a % of a value(work, ressources, etc) and thus should be rather immune to inflation on its own.
It is also an addition (compared to the multiplicative nature of minimum wage). It is much harder to negate an addition than a multiplication through division.