Current Events > Do you believe in UBI? (Universal Basic Income)

(+) Yeah! (+)

Guide posted...

For once, just once, I'd like to see some statistics on people getting too lazy to work from a UBI.

I know welfare queens are a thing, sure, but how many examples are there of people who stop working without medical reason, just to collect? What % of the potential working populace does that, or is projected to do that?

Oddly, my thoughts against it are based in where I work. ie: my boss buys some new software to save him time on menial tasks and free up time for more strategic work. The fact he'll take a year or better to set it up notwithstanding, once he does he spends his time chatting with employees, micromanaging tasks he doesn't need to be involved in, redecorating the office, and still complaining he doesn't have time to do those things he bought the software to enable him to do. People mean well, and aren't being fully dishonest, but as I said, there's always an excuse to not do something you really didn't want to.

Honestly, other than a sense of idealism, what do you guys have to think UBI wouldn't be the first step to a wider welfare program for people that just don't want to work.

---

Annihilated posted...

This is why to some extent I support basic income as a "supplemental" service, except I know that eventually it will become corrupted into something like "BASIC income means LIVING income" just like minimum wage has. And no amount of money will ever be enough to placate everyone. It'll either be too much in low cost of living states or too little in expensive ones.

Maybe they could just raise it with inflation every year to keep people satisfied.

---

lightwarrior78 posted...

Oddly, my thoughts against it are based in where I work. ie: my boss buys some new software to save him time on menial tasks and free up time for more strategic work. The fact he'll take a year or better to set it up notwithstanding, once he does he spends his time chatting with employees, micromanaging tasks he doesn't need to be involved in, redecorating the office, and still complaining he doesn't have time to do those things he bought the software to enable him to do.

Honestly, other than a sense of idealism, what do you guys have to think UBI wouldn't be the first step to a wider welfare program for people that just don't want to work.

Slippery slope isn't a complete argument.

---

Tired-Insomniac posted...

Maybe they could just raise it with inflation every year to keep people satisfied.

That's another problem. How do we know that the extra income won't be baked into things like rent, education, and consumer goods? Just like how the cost of college has been skyrocketing ever since student loans became available to pretty much everyone. Universities thought "hey, they have money now, and WE like money, so why not have them give more of that money to us?"

Solid Sonic posted...

Slippery slope isn't a complete argument.

Not a slippery slope. Just wondering if the person wanting numbers had any of their own, or even some halfway decent ancedotal evidence, and this "UBI can work" thing isn't based in the same minds that can't keep new years resolutions.

---

Annihilated posted...

As I've said, people have been working in one form or another since the dawn of man. It's in our blood. Hunting, farming, building, fishing, trading, delivering, researching, educating, there has always been something for people to do that improves their own survival as well as the survival of others. Having nothing but leisure time does not make most people happy. Look at how many famous actors and rich people are always getting into failed marriages, legal troubles, and suicides. Studies have shown that people in poorer countries than the U.S. are also happier than people in the U.S., which would not be the case if money were the reason for happiness.

That's why I believe that if people had more say over how they spend their time, they would choose to do things that make them happy. People in the US are unhappy because they spend their entire lives working and don't have any leisure time. The structured 40 hour work week is a depression factory and culturally destructive.

---

el_cheato posted...

That's why I believe that if people had more say over how they spend their time, they would choose to do things that make them happy. People in the US are unhappy because they spend their entire lives working and don't have any leisure time. The structured 40 hour work week is a depression factory and culturally destructive.

There has to be a happy medium between 40 and 0 hours. I do believe that spending some time doing shit you don't want to do is good for you. You may want to play vidya 24/7, but it's not going to make you a happy person.

---

el_cheato posted...

That's why I believe that if people had more say over how they spend their time, they would choose to do things that make them happy. People in the US are unhappy because they spend their entire lives working and don't have any leisure time. The structured 40 hour work week is a depression factory and culturally destructive.

None of those things are the reason people are unhappy. More than half of people either tolerate or actually like their jobs, and doing things on its own doesn't make you happy. What matters is human connection, which is the biggest thing that we're missing compared to decades ago and compared to other countries. We're making fewer friends, living farther away from families, going to fewer community gatherings like church or volunteering, and even dating is mostly just ghosting now. The idea that people doing whatever they please all the time or getting them whatever they want is harmful. Spoiled children are the unhappiest children and they always grow up to be bad and selfish people.

EndOfDiscOne posted...

There has to be a happy medium between 40 and 0 hours. I do believe that spending some time doing shit you don't want to do is good for you. You may want to play vidya 24/7, but it's not going to make you a happy person.

This is partly true I think, there is a sense of accomplishment behind the daily grind that makes all the other activities we enjoy feel special, and more importantly, feel earned. But I think the emphasis is not so much on whether or not you want to do the work as much as the constructiveness and the impact of the work itself. Job satisfaction is almost always higher in places where people are able to see the fruits of their labor, while tedious bureaucratic middle management type jobs are kind of mindless and soulless. There doesn't feel like there's any point to it, even though you know in abstract what your job is for.

MrToothHasYou posted...

I would softly support it as long it isn't implemented in the way that, for example, Andrew Yang sought (i.e. UBI wholly replacing entitlements and social welfare nets), but I mostly see it as a band-aid

this is a good take

but unfortunately there is no possibility of UBI being implemented in any other way. the push for UBI is coming from a neoliberal direction. they'll likely use it as an opportunity to cut other social programs too.

another way of thinking about it: giving $1000 each to four tenants is effectively giving $4000 to their landlord. providing housing (and food, and other essential services) directly would solve this problem in a way that giving people money cannot

---

Annihilated posted...

None of those things are the reason people are unhappy. More than half of people either tolerate or actually like their jobs, and doing things on its own doesn't make you happy. What matters is human connection, which is the biggest thing that we're missing compared to decades ago and compared to other countries. We're making fewer friends, living farther away from families, going to fewer community gatherings like church or volunteering, and even dating is mostly just ghosting now. The idea that people doing whatever they please all the time or getting them whatever they want is harmful. Spoiled children are the unhappiest children and they always grow up to be bad and selfish people.

Do you not see a connection between too much time spent working and being deprived of community?

---

el_cheato posted...

Do you not see a connection between too much time spent working and being deprived of community?

It's not because of time spent at work, we've been working 40 hour work weeks for about a hundred years at least. Nowadays it's because of technology and fear.

Annihilated posted...

It's not because of time spent at work, we've been working 40 hour work weeks for about a hundred years at least.

before that it was more than 40, and before capitalism it was significantly less than 40

---

Eh I don't hate the idea as much as I used to but it still seems inefficient af for the gov't to take my money and then give it back instead if just letting me keep it.

---

coming around to ubi as a preferable alternative to government programs

granted the barrier to entry for providers of goods and services this money is spent on is lowered or eliminated

as individual spending habits encourage competition, and bureaucracy can potentially be drastically reduced as well

---

DevsBro posted...

Eh I don't hate the idea as much as I used to but it still seems inefficient af for the gov't to take my money and then give it back instead if just letting me keep it.

You're right that an income tax under this system would be completely redundant, and possibly some of the social entitlements. Which is why the model of government revenue would have to shift from taxing income to taxing consumption, possibly a federal sales tax, increased capital gains taxes, real estate taxes, among other things. The underlying philosophy is that we as people are pretty shitty at managing money.

It's the fact so many jobs push the whole 40 hour work week and that there's groups of people who grovel to their employers/corporations. Studies have shown that on average an 8 hour work day is about 3-4 hours of actual productivity. Now that's not all jobs of course.

There's so many BS jobs that there's even a book about it by David Graeber. Now we have automation and remote work being magnified which will create even more freed up time. There has to be reforms to our work culture if that means UBI, 4 day work week, 30 full time, minimum wage increases, rent control, etc...

So many people here thinking "work will set you free"

---

Solid Sonic posted...

I'm someone who would want to see UBI but I'm concerned about the knock-on effect it may have.

To me it sort of seems like insurance (that is the more people who pay in the better your premium becomes) so if everyone is entitled to a monthly payout of $1000, doesn't that increase the burden on those paying into the system to keep it afloat?

No, because it would be funded by companies that use automation instead of low skilled workers. Would cost said company less money to pay the taxes for using machines than it would to hire a sizable number of people and pay them a low wage.

AzNDarkSamurai posted...

Honestly Id be willing to pay higher taxes if it goes to good causes like helping Americans have a safety net no matter what happens

Any politician that says taxes would need to go up is blowing smoke in your ass. The US pays way more than they need to for taxes as it is.

I like how people have no actual real argument except for people need to work and laziness, society will rot, etc. $1000 isnt shit. I know some of you dont have your own source of income and dont really need money except $50 every few weeks but if you did, you would realize that $1000 is not a lot of money. Its about enough to keep pay rent and have a few cheap meals but its not like theres any left over to leave the house with and put towards committing crimes.

Yang outlined his ideas very well without any room for confusion. If you dont think $1000 per month is enough to live off of (its not lol) then go get a job. The $1000 per month is to make sure you dont starve or lose your house.

---

I've never seen any evidence to suggest that people would just stop working as a result of UBI. Quite the contrary, work culture has become so ingrained in the public consciousness, I largely consider the "lazy people just leeching off of UBI" to be nothing but a boogeyman
---

EdgeMaster posted...

Any politician that says taxes would need to go up is blowing smoke in your ass. The US pays way more than they need to for taxes as it is.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

how are grown adults this bad at math

Broseph_Stalin posted...

how are grown adults this bad at math

Couldnt actually quote your last post.

Its not a math skills kind of thing, its a politicians piss away so much tax payer money after they spend what they need kind of thing.

You could routinely fuck up doing double and triple digit math grocery shopping, yet you could still comprehend that recently the US government just pulled $1.6 trillion out of its ass, or that Obama donated $150 billion to the hezbolas in Iran, or the $500 billion to the UNs Green Climate Fund.

Billions are big numbers... no one just writes a check that big from their personal salary. Id much rather have free healthcare or $1000 per month on top of my salary than have money taken out of my salary to fund terrorism or whatever the current administration thinks is worth pissing away money on.

I hope you understand numbers and government inefficiency a bit better now. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

---

Timohtep posted...

Yes. Every citizen should be guaranteed enough money to pay for at least the most basic housing, and food.

---

people are ridiculous. people aren't going to stop working because they are making 12k a year

EdgeMaster posted...

Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

Yeah man thanks hopefully I didn't lose too many brain cells reading that abomination of a post. I would love to talk about how you don't know what a repo is or that you fell for some dumb facebook post about Obama giving Iran money, but lets stay focused on how much you suck at math.

$1000 dollars to every adult in the US per month would add up to over $3 trillion dollars a year. The entire federal government budget is only $4.4 trillion. You're talking about a 70% increase like it's the equivalent of skipping out on Starbucks every day.

I hope you understand numbers a bit better now.

$1000 a month is shit for money.

---

averagejoel posted...

this is a good take

but unfortunately there is no possibility of UBI being implemented in any other way. the push for UBI is coming from a neoliberal direction. they'll likely use it as an opportunity to cut other social programs too.

another way of thinking about it: giving $1000 each to four tenants is effectively giving $4000 to their landlord. providing housing (and food, and other essential services) directly would solve this problem in a way that giving people money cannot

You just described how giving people money could cover food and essential services

If anything it will be more effective because people can spend it proportionate to what they need, and with less of it being diverted to administrative costs

---

please don't respond to joel

Spooking posted...

No, I don't believe UBI will work. There are far too many people and not enough money to go around.

You can't expect the rich to take care of you from cradle to grave.

The rich get rich by screwing other people over (most of the time) so it is only right for them to give back

---

Ubi would be good. It would marginally reduce hours worked, and that's fine

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Yeah man thanks hopefully I didn't lose too many brain cells reading that abomination of a post. I would love to talk about how you don't know what a repo is or that you fell for some dumb facebook post about Obama giving Iran money, but lets stay focused on how much you suck at math.

$1000 dollars to every adult in the US per month would add up to over $3 trillion dollars a year. The entire federal government budget is only $4.4 trillion. You're talking about a 70% increase like it's the equivalent of skipping out on Starbucks every day.

I hope you understand numbers a bit better now.

Im aware what a repo is. Way to assume I get my news from Facebook. Open a newspaper.

You seemed to completely miss the fact that tax payer dollars are often pissed away.

I wrote that post around 6am. My bad I couldnt be fucked to put more effort into it and cite a list of sources. Yangs proposal would float money from existing government programs and tax companies that use automation in order to fund the rest.

Not sure who pissed in your Cheerios this morning, but maybe if you were a bit more level headed youd be able think clear enough to understand that $1000 per month is possible without fucking citizens out of more of their money.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Yeah man thanks hopefully I didn't lose too many brain cells reading that abomination of a post. I would love to talk about how you don't know what a repo is or that you fell for some dumb facebook post about Obama giving Iran money, but lets stay focused on how much you suck at math.

$1000 dollars to every adult in the US per month would add up to over $3 trillion dollars a year. The entire federal government budget is only $4.4 trillion. You're talking about a 70% increase like it's the equivalent of skipping out on Starbucks every day.

I hope you understand numbers a bit better now.

You don't need to give money to every American, only the ~40 million in poverty who actually need it. Try again.

That's not a ubi

---

We spend more then enough on our social programs already so no. Work more so on reducing the cost of essentials like housing then writing meaningless $ checks that wont benefit anyone honestly except a very small % of people.

---

The housing issue is hard because of federalism

---

Balrog0 posted...

The housing issue is hard because of federalism

It's essential though because it'll eat through UBI funds on a heartbeat.

---

I'm just telling you the facts my man

The federal government can't really touch housing, it's a state issue constitutionally and one that states have more or less passed onto cities and other localities

I didn't write the constitution or participate in any of the cases that have been used to interpret it

I personally believe the constitution hampers our ability to function in a modern society and will be the unraveling of our empire but most people think it safeguards liberties (which it does do sometimes tbf)

---

I recently came around on Ubi and I'm totally into it now. That said, I don't think it should be a number that's enough to live off of, but more so enough to give people some extra spending money on a regular basis. incentivize people to keep working, but also give them a little kickback every month so that they can support local businesses.

---

LostForest posted...

I recently came around on Ubi and I'm totally into it now. That said, I don't think it should be a number that's enough to live off of, but more so enough to give people some extra spending money on a regular basis. incentivize people to keep working, but also give them a little kickback every month so that they can support local businesses.

I dunno, I think most people are still gonna spend the money at Walmart and Amazon.

---

Rexdragon125 posted...

You don't need to give money to every American, only the ~40 million in poverty who actually need it. Try again.

When you don't know what the U in UBI stands for.

EdgeMaster posted...

Way to assume I get my news from Facebook. Open a newspaper.

you're parroting boomer obama conspiracies dude

EdgeMaster posted...

You seemed to completely miss the fact that tax payer dollars are often pissed away.

I can promise you that 70% of the federal budget is not pissed away

g980 posted...

You just described how giving people money could cover food and essential services

no. I said that providing those services directly would actually solve some problems in a way that giving people money cannot.

If anything it will be more effective because people can spend it proportionate to what they need, and with less of it being diverted to administrative costs

with UBI, the money is largely ending up in the hands of people who own those essential services (housing, grocery stores, etc). they're unnecessary for those services, so the most efficient option is to take them out of the equation entirely and just have the services provided via public rather than private means

---