Universal basic income

Universal basic income.

Good or bad?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/JP_KVfuiLXQ
youtu.be/cPK38deKcMc
youtube.com/watch?v=C766f_DFNwI
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Useless. I've done the calculations many times, and there simply isn't enough money in the budget to give everyone a UBI worth shit. The most you could do is enable crackheads.

Bad. It's paying not to rebel against the establishment in the coming age of automation. They will give shitty scraps, while they will own the productive force of the world, and making big infinite bucks with it.

Do you think having money for bangbros, pizza hut and beer pays trillions of dollars in profit? It should all be for the nation, not for the elite fags.

Government funded mediocrity.

bad
it devalues the currency

Helicopter money is dumb as fuck.
Instead of give random money the state should make jobs.
Pay for something, even cleaning street, digging holes, washing dicks and whatever shit.
There is ALWAYS something to do.

This is one of my opinions.

The other is that in the wake of automation, capitalism will put people out of work for more efficient cheap labor. The people then get income because if they don't, the now cheap services would serve no one.

But if you rebel, and set up a state that outlaws automation to keep people employed, you're essentially halting capitalism to give people job handouts. Is that any better?

Yes, that couple be a wallet full of deutschmarks for all we know

This
State should reward you for doing stuff not just for sitting in your home and drinking

They will simply kill and get rid of the neets, because they are now worthless baggage.

They don't produce, and they are a potential risk of political uprising against the ultimate scheme ever: intelligent work machines that don't rebel.

Under a fascist state, that worked for their people, automation could be used to produce food, medicine, weapons and stuff for the people. Profit doesn't matter that much when you have the possibility of national ascencion.

Yes, it will primarily benefit young males that dropped out of society.

Age of automation should go along with a new nationalism. There is no other way people will benefit from it, only bankers and fat cats.

Money should be given to ill people, not NEETs. Genocide all NEETs already

Well it's the future one way or the other, it's only a matter of when not if.

Bad.

The point of UBI is to provide working people with temporary cushion in case they either temporary lose the job or lose the workability in certain circumstances. (e.g. If rendered disabled by a nigger)

But the Universal part is just retarded and does more harm because it enables freeloaders.

This, I'd rather prefer state giving help in finding the job.

Though it walks straight into opposite idiocy with barely paid sweatshopping.

It's welfare essentially. A Cashless Society having UBI is a powerful form of Control.

KB with important intel:

Why are you so mad that some of us don't want to work? I thought you enjoyed your fulfilling career.

Also, it's not like we're living like kings. I get a few hundred a month and spend it on rent, food and internet. You can travel and go to bars on your nice salary.

Automation is the future. Get out of the way.

Is it worth it becoming a NEET fag? I'm about to graduate from school next year but I dont want to get a job really. I have anxiety and Im pretty aspy. What do I need to do to get on that NEET life? Pls teach me.

kek, why should you get anything if you don't want to work?

Compared to what?

In a vacuum it is flawed because it is either so low that it is meaningless or high enough that many people will have no incentive to work. Not to mention it becomes an immigration honey pot.

However, compared to the welfare system we already have, it could actually save us money without making the incentives worse than they already are.

It will never happen, the elite will never pay people for existing, it goes against everything that our socioeconomic system is founded on, even if tens of millions are starving on the streets (and I feel those days will come), it will not be implemented.

Don't you guys get it yet? The rich don't care about us, they never have, we are their worker bees and when they don't need us anymore they will let as many of us die as they see fit. The future is going to be very dystopian, many will commit suicide or just check out completely.

The idea is good, but will it work in the long run? Well some things that I think would need to be in palce:
- Only after the age 21 (when people are expected to be in a job or started an higher education). This to prevent NEET's straight from High School.
- A sum that would barely cover the cost of rent of a dorm in cities or a small studio apartment in cheaper places + food and public transport, + some extra that you would have to save over several months if you wanted to buy new (cheap) clothes/useless shit etc.
- REGISTRATION so that the people recieve them spend the money in the country that pays for them (stimulates the economy). You would have to live in the country.
- Everyone would have to get it. No matter income, the same fee once you turn 21.

Good because:
- You can survive without having to bow down to the state our a boss.
- Less bureaucracy
- Much easier to go in-between jobs, young people new to the job market, students etc.

This wouldn't work in the US, and not in Europe once we reach American levels of multiculturalism though. If Norway stopped all immigration at once, I think it would work here.

Why not? I'm the one suffering because I don't get the luxury of a successful, fulfilling job. I'll never get to raise a family or go boating on the weekends while you live a great a life. Why can't you let me be a loser in peace?

>Don't you guys get it yet? The rich don't care about us, they never have
Why should they?
What makes you so special dude?
Work=money
Sub par work= sub par money
Don't like job? Look for new one
It's really quite fucking easy but a lot of people around seem to make it seem like your employer is asking you to lift gold bars for 8 hours.
Climb the fucking ladder, it doesn't take months, it's easy to be a bad ass at work for a few months, try being a bad ass for a few years, you'll notice how easy raises are, how much more respect you get for being good enough to do your job well and covering everyone's asses.
You don't deserve free money buddy, sorry your parents and the education system failed you or tricked you into thinking you were going to be a CEO by wishing for it hard enough.

it's a decent idea worth trying. it will help alleviate the criminality.

IF
YOU
WANT
IT,
EARN
IT

how about voluntary only taxes?

It wouldn't be much at all to get by on. Would the stock market still exist? I see no other way to accumulate wealth, assuming universal unemployment.

>let the government control everyone's wages and means of survival
>surely this will not spell the end of our remaining civil liberties

Good for neets and those who don't give a flying fuck about society.

But it literally is the elite paying people to not rebel.

They know we are fucking sick of this system so one of their last resorts is to "Give em free money"

say no to the jwo.

welfare or ubi or whatever you call it is catastrophic without breeding controls

>it is either so low that it is meaningless

Not true. I would greatly appreciate a monthly $100 check from Uncle Sam

They will when we're standing at their doorstep with pitchforks and dirty bombs

...

You've been talking about it forever. Someone just try it and see how it goes already

you already have a welfare system dummy.

>budget

found the retard
It's obvious that crypto currency will make distributing basic income a breeze. Where will be get the money from? What does that even mean? Give everyone basic income. Everyone. Basic income would be useless to the rich. The money would pool and go back to the poor. The poor will use the money to rev the economy on levels you have never seen before.

>lazy nigger mooches deserve to be paid

the people working whose paychecks are stolen to finance your lazy ass are the ones who are suffering. if you want to be a loser then you get zero. you're not entitled to anything; especially in america.

the whole idea doesn't even make sense, economically. what if everyone took the offer of neetbux and there were no workers? who would finance your existence then?

>the people working whose paychecks are stolen to finance your lazy ass are the ones who are suffering

Isn't working fulfilling and worthwhile in itself? How are they suffering if they get the reward of knowing that they add value to society?

>you're not entitled to anything

Is anyone entitled to anything?

>what if everyone took the offer of neetbux and there were no workers

Why would they? I thought people work because they like it.

Also, most people don't appreciate the neet life. Having just enough to make ends meet for a single person doesn't interest most people.

>Implying I ever said that UBI was a good idea

All I said was that UBI isn't viable and will therefore never occur because of the current socioeconomic power structures.

No, starve the bums.

>131002252
ok, you got me. i should have known you were a troll. no more (You)s

Cuck bitch

Unsustainable. All society will need to be restructured for the robot economy, not just giving out a few gibs to everyone who can't get a jerb anymore.

These would be the same people who would be advocating for universal basic feedbags for all the unemployed horses when the car was introduced and started to catch on. It's not going to work.

I'm against is but I can understand certain arguments for it. For example, none of us choose to be born and live in this world, yet we are expected to work and toil for whatever country we end up being born in. Some just would rather never have been born at all, but when suicide is outlawed, living becomes a chore and I can empathize with that sentiment that a UBI would make it less so. Regardless, the major flaw of it is the fact that someone, most likely a coerced taxpayer would have to pay for this. Otherwise, annexing and farming foreign countries to support it would be the only other way.

This is for australia. I think we should all just be employees of the government. Theres thousands of government departments working to achieve some sort of goal. Why not just include society? The welfare system just gives money to people if they jump through hoops. We're all part of society and contribute in our own way. Why not just engage EVERYONE for the purpose of moving forward.

Hope that makes sense.

better than a welfare state, worse than replicators

This.

I'm too ashamed to claim NEETbux, but if the state gave me a job I would be happy.

It is, without nationalism is a shitty future.

this would be sweet. no interviews or hassling bullshit. they just plop you in a job the next day. that would kick ass.

bad

>suicide becomes outlawed

What are they gunna do? Kill me? Jokes on them lol

I do think it is a possible with the prospects of automation.
It is NOT possible with a bunch of shitskins who don't have the same cultural mindset and just churn out 8 shitskins due to the lack of natural predators.
Only white people are able to be regulated through morality alone. Shitskins are just parasites that leech off the system until it dies.

Yes, but at the same time it's communism.

What the fuck is the point of that? It's a consensus among economists that the new deal wasn't beneficial.

>Universal basic income.
>Good or bad?
Who decides how much and where does money come from?
Bezos and Zuckerberg ain't paying for it.

No, just force you to live and work, pay taxes and remain a working cog in the machine.

At this point I'm ok if it ever happens. I'm just tired of working my ass off to feed laquanda down the street who's shitting out 5 kids

the issue there is, if you only get paid when you don't work, you have an incentive not to start working. If getting an entry level job means you lose your benefits, it's like you're getting taxed 80% on minimum wage jobs. It's a perverse incentive.

That's why the 'Universal' part is important. That and it cuts down on bureaucracy

Everyone's favorite Kike Sam Harris shares his thoughts on universal basic income.

youtu.be/JP_KVfuiLXQ

youtu.be/cPK38deKcMc

I was making a joke, friend.

this. people will get enough money to live in a shitty apartment with enough money to stuff yourself with mcdonalds and beer all day.

Debt?

India and Canada did.

new business startups increased threefold, high school graduation rates increased, hospital admissions decreased...

And that was before automation was driving everyone from truckers to lawyers out of business

Gas the crackheads and deport the darkies then we can start talking about universal income. A socialist state can only work with a large helping of nationalism on the side. Publicly owned farming could work, but we would have to publicly hang anybody corrupt.

That's currently the case as social pressure prevents most suicidals from ending their lives. I'd say this is more coercive than law as this norm is enforced by society which comprises everyone you know whereas laws are merely enforced by the state.

don't you mean kike bitch?

As far as the US goes the state does not have the right to use my tax dollars to feed niggers and Communists, or for any social programs for that matter.

This country is infested and it will soon burn, and then the constitution will be adhered to again.

I like the way you think.

I'd be fine with this, I don't mind working, when I've had a job my work ethic was impeccable.

I got stuck taking care of my grandmother for a while due to a broken leg and no one else to take care of her and now I just can't find a job.

Theres probably more countries than that.

No, he's a pussy who hates his life and wants everyone to work and be as miserable as he is. He spends most of his time getting fucked in the ass by his employer and he wants everyone else to do the same.

easy way to make bezos and zuck pay for it - print it. When you print money, anyone hoarding money takes it in the shorts. So a side effect if done that way would be to make capitalists invest again.

>that quote.
There's a difference. Under socialism, materialism is mandatory. In capitalism, pursuing materialistic ends is optional, and generally economically unsound.

>the state does not have the right

Yes it does. Might makes right, pussy.

Fiat money doesn't create wealth. Productivity is what makes you rich.

Charles Murray on the Universal Basic Income

youtube.com/watch?v=C766f_DFNwI

I'm NEET I want free money to buy pot noodles and glowsticks.

>In capitalism, pursuing materialistic ends is optional, and generally economically unsound.

Then why is the world's capitalist capital, the USA, also the most materialist?

Funny how they have made us all into niggers

It's not good or bad, it's essentially useless.

UBI will only lead to inflation to a point where the amount given could no longer sustain cost of living.

It might work in the short term if you periodically increase the amount given, but in the long term, you are going to devalue the currency Zimbabwe style.

To put it simply, Zimbabwe thought printing more money for nothing = wealth increase. How is that any different from giving away money for essentially nothing?

The value of money is not only based in supply and demand, but also effort used for it to be earned.

Sadly, it won't work well with the current culture and irresponsible people.

It would require an economic overhaul and how we view certain commodities or housing.

I'm not saying it isn't a bad idea, in fact communism / socialism has at the basic levels of housing, food and healthcare are a good thing...

The bad thing is when you find out that half the population doesn't want to work much at all.

If everyone wanted to learn, work, love and be benevolent, we wouldn't be working 60 hour weeks just to keep the system running.

We could cut down the work week to around 20 hours per individual and the rest would be up the individual of what kind of work they would want to do.

We simply don't live in a world where everyone want to help and give as much as they want to take and abuse.

communism

The state dosent produce or create anything and with the monopoly in currency with a central bank, adopting this police not only will lead to inflation it will fuck even more the market and the productive members of society

Not it wouldn't, moron. It's a matter of wealth redistribution, not printing money.

What makes the USA more materialistic than, say, China?

Would work in an all white conservative society. Then again, so would communism. Neither are realistic with actual demographics.

meant for
I'm retarded.

Good. There's already not enough jobs even for people who actively want to work. Give people what they need to survive and then they'll only need to work for what they want. Bam, instant relief on the job market bing bong bing so simple.

Worst thing ever

emphasis on optional in the US you have the choice under capitalism and the best choice isnt always the popular choice hence many people buy materialist bull shit even when it is economicly unwise

Doesn't matter, current system or UBI will collapse anyway, and you won't get to decide if it's implemented or not, just dont let it make you weak and dependent

I favour UBI with a partial amount, so that you'd still need a basic job to cover living expenses, this extra bonus (paid to all, even the rich) can give people some breathing room to learn new skills, pay off old debts, change their job, change location, hire someone, etc, allowing them to improve their position, but not enough to live care free and wasteful

then increase/decrease this amount slowly as the economy adjusts so that there is still control

UBI will inflate the currency and devalue slightly, but there's no way you can take taxes from the rich to pay everyone in society, a better thing would be encourage the rich to invest in creating PRODUCTIVE jobs for others since they have better experience at doing these things than gov

right now the economy feels more like 8 people passing around 6 tokens, which is why everything has slowed down, there's not a lack of things to do, but lack of ability to do so because money is tight for all, and people hang onto what little they have.

You simply don't grasp the concept of perceived value do you?

Let me give you a simple scenario.

A trust fund kiddie who has never worked a day in his life is more than willing to pay $50 on a roll of toilet paper, because you know... daddy's money

Meanwhile a burger flipper earning $7 an hour would see $50 as feeding his family for a few days

Socialism isn't a problem if everyone agrees on something.

for example, if everyone agreed to pool their money in at a party to buy food, everyone can enjoy the food.

The problem is when only half the people put money in the pool and the other half don't want to work buy continuously demand more from that pool.

It's a human problem. Not a fundamental issue with socialism itself.

I pay taxes, I want my roads and bridges to be taken care of.

so if there is any problem with socialism, the problem is running out of other people's money and work force.

good for the first wave of people who get it, completely and totally detrimental to their children, their children's children, and the state's property that would be their children's children's children.

>1 post by this ID

>kek, why should you get anything if you don't want to work?
Some people can't work or can't get hired, I am legally blind so getting hired anywhere is out of the question.