Moving Forward on Basic Income

Post by pif » Wed, Jun 01, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #899

wyager wrote: post #886

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a foolish analogy. The Mafia uses violence to force people to "agree" to things. If one "can't say no" to a contract because their pre-contract situation sucks and will be improved by adopting the contract, they have suffered no violence.

What difference does it make if the threat is actual violence or leaving you without an income so you end up on the street? What matters is not the particulars of the unpleasantness that awaits you if you don't accept the mafia's/corporation's offer, but the fact that the unpleasantness is a consequence of a situation that the mafia/corporation have themselves created.

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Jun 01, 2016, 4:34 PM UTC

livestyle wrote: post #930

dragonwriter wrote: post #928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We know how people respond already. It's called welfare. Welfare is not the same as BI, and has different structural incentives, so there is no reason to expect that people will respond to BI the same as they do to means-tested welfare programs. > Do we have an energy boom like Alaska etc and fund it that way? No, we have a "growing returns to capital" boom, and fund it by taxing capital the same as other income, r…

> No, we have a "growing returns to capital" boom, and fund it by taxing capital the same as other income, rather than tax favoring it. Could you please provide some sort of example of this? > Welfare is not the same as BI, and has different structural incentives, so there is no reason to expect that people will respond to BI the same as they do to means-tested welfare programs. I'm well aware they are not the same.…

Post by mrgoldenbrown » Wed, Jun 01, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

Zikes wrote: post #912

autokad wrote: post #909

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you loved austrailia so much, move back. you have to take the 'bad' with the good. we built a system that enables people with ideas to chase their dreams and succeed. that means companies have the ability to pay people with low skills and experience less than those with. honestly, if you are being treated like a slave, move to another company. if you cant, you don't have skills employers want. get them. during the…

Speaking as a native American, I cannot disagree more. The spirit and very origin of our great nation is to never accept the bad with the good, but to doggedly pursue the very best in everything.

Post by alttab » Wed, Jun 01, 2016, 4:50 PM UTC

auntyJemima wrote: post #925

autokad wrote: post #909

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you loved austrailia so much, move back. you have to take the 'bad' with the good. we built a system that enables people with ideas to chase their dreams and succeed. that means companies have the ability to pay people with low skills and experience less than those with. honestly, if you are being treated like a slave, move to another company. if you cant, you don't have skills employers want. get them. during the…

You sound like some kind of redneck with that "go back to your country" bullshit. Someone is making very good points and that's the best thing you can say.

Post by ConfuciusSay02 » Wed, Jun 01, 2016, 4:55 PM UTC

hellodevnull wrote: post #860

InclinedPlane wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic income has a whole host of pretty interesting self-reinforcing feedback loops that seemingly would improve things overall. For example, people would be more likely to leave jobs that were unsafe, treated people poorly, etc. Including situations where employers weren't following labor laws and regulations (which is a huge problem today). Meaning that maybe it'd be more likely that the fire code, sanitary regulat…

Same logic is used in free market arguments: Workers leaving jobs to go to other companies creates an incentive for employers to improve work environments. In both scenarios the workplaces become better off, but what really happens in practice is less than ideal.