2,757
 

Feb 18 - This Is How We'll Live When the Government Gives Us All a Basic Income


ADVERTISEMENT
 


section  x1   |  0 bx goons and 1 bystanders Share this on Twitter       Share this on Facebook

section news /page 2
  
 2 months ago '06        #1
5475 page views
88 comments


RAZAH CUTS  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x41
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 54151 54 K  Slaps total: 7958 7 K
Feb 18 - This Is How We'll Live When the Government Gives Us All a Basic Income
 

 
Capitalism’s single-minded emphasis on profit has warped our ideas about purpose and usefulness in work. Universal basic income could change that.


image

Imagine, for a moment, that the robots have won.

The year is 2049—the same year researchers once pegged as the one in which A.I. would become smart enough to pen a bestselling book more adeptly than a human author could. Technological advancements have upended the transportation, manufacturing and retail sectors, rendering nearly half of the U.S. jobs that existed in the year 2020 obsolete.

You’ve just had a surgery—a relatively minor, outpatient procedure performed by a surgical robot—and now you’re on your way to the pharmacy to fill a prescription for the pain. The car that transports you there is driverless, as are all the other vehicles on the road. At the drugstore, a mechanical arm sifts through rows of pharmaceuticals before meting out and packing up the correct dosage of pills for you. After a few minutes spent scanning the magazine rack in the pharmacy’s automated checkout line, you settle at the last minute on a trashy tabloid; some of the articles inside of it are the handiwork of particularly sophisticated A.I.

In this automated world, there are fewer jobs available. To be clear, experts aren’t totally convinced that the coming robot revolution will render all jobs outmoded at any point in the future, near or far. But imagining a post-work society is a useful gateway into thinking about how to preserve dignity and stay afloat in the capitalist soup that unfettered neoliberalism has made in the 21st century, and how to address yawning inequality and wage stagnation as an increasingly automated future takes root.

One hypothetical solution to both problems is universal basic income, or UBI. At its most essential, a UBI is a guaranteed cash transfer that a government disseminates directly to people, regardless of how much or how little money they make. Its proponents argue that its dual gifts are dignity and security: By having the cash in-hand without the paternalistic meddling of the welfare state, UBI recipients have the freedom to choose how to invest in their own futures. And by establishing a nationwide income floor, a UBI could simultaneously help to ensure that workers are at least somewhat protected from the privatization and technological obsolescence that threaten to destabilize entire industries.


Although former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang helped push the program into the mainstream by championing the idea of a $1,000 monthly “Freedom Dividend” as a central plank in his 2020 campaign, the concept of UBI has existed for centuries, stretching as far back as the 16th century, when English philosopher Thomas More slipped a casual reference to a guaranteed minimum income into his socio-political satire Utopia. Various iterations of the concept have been tested all around the world, from Kenya to India to the Netherlands to Alaska, and it is currently the subject of a pilot program in Stockton, California.

Natalie Foster, a co-chair and co-founder of the Economic Security Project—“a network that supports the exploration and experimentation of a guaranteed income”—says that capitalism’s single-minded emphasis on profit and profitability has so warped our ideas about purpose and usefulness in work, that some of the most valuable roles in our social contract sometimes go unpaid and undervalued.

Capitalism’s single-minded emphasis on profit has so warped our ideas about purpose and usefulness in work, that some of the most valuable roles in our social contract sometimes go unpaid and undervalued.

“We [as a country] say if you're taking care of a family member who is disabled and you stay at home with them, that's not work. And that makes no sense,” Foster said. “We need to broaden our understanding of work, and I think a guaranteed income gets us closer to that.”

But debates about what constitutes work aren’t purely semantic. The gulf between America’s richest and poorest citizens is currently the widest it’s been since the Census Bureau first began recording wealth data more than 50 years ago, and as many as 40 percent of Americans say they would be unable to cover an emergency $400 medical expense, should the situation arise. A UBI, Foster said, is “one of the ways you can start to rebalance the economy by putting money back in people’s pockets”—and a way to infuse a sense of pride back into an American workforce that has been stripped stripped of its dignity over the years.

“That’s the power of a guaranteed income: saying that no matter who you are and what you do, every month, you know you have income that can help you pay the rent, pay bills, take care of childcare, deal with a vehicle expense, and allow you to take more risks with work or to leave a job you don’t love, or more importantly to stop the second or third job that you have to do in order to put food on the table,” Foster said.

A UBI, it’s worth noting, wouldn’t eliminate the need for work entirely; after all, $1,000 a month, as some have proposed—already considered in some quarters to be a nearly cost-prohibitive price tag for a universally applied program—is hardly enough money to get by in most American cities. But the program would necessitate a radical philosophical shift in the ways that we think about work, and the role that self-esteem plays in our labor.

With guaranteed income, workers could turn down a job that they didn’t want to do, or to forgo a second or third job in favor of spending more time with family.

It would, for example, imbue workers with enough economic security to turn down a job that they didn’t want to do, or to forgo a second or third job in favor of spending more time with family and loved ones. Andy Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), has in the past referred to UBI as a national strike fund—one that effectively creates bargaining power for striking workers by ensuring that they wouldn’t have to cross a picket line in order to be able to afford their cost of living.

But while a UBI wouldn’t do away with the need for work entirely, experts say that’s not much of an issue to begin with: People want to work, in part because they derive so much of their social value from it.

Ioana Marinescu, an a*sistant professor of labor market economics at the University of Pennsylvania, says research shows that there is little to no effect of a UBI on people’s propensity to work. As an example, she points to lottery winners, who oftentimes receive their winnings in recurring installments that mimic the frequency at which a UBI is distributed.

“Whether in the U.S. or Sweden, most of [the winners] kind of keep doing what they were doing before, but feel more comfortable. Most people keep working, take a bit more vacation, feel more financially secure, and that’s about it," Marinescu said. "It suggests that the changes are not enormous, except for the fact of feeling more financially secure.”

Nearly 30 years after the conclusion of a well-known guaranteed income trial that was conducted in the tiny town of Dauphin, in Canada’s Manitoba Province, Evelyn Forget, a health economist and professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences at the University of Manitoba, set out to debunk the same myth.

Known colloquially as “mincome,” the pilot in Dauphin had first launched in the 1970’s, she said, and researchers had been primarily interested in finding out whether or not basic income would cause recipients to work less or stop working altogether. According to Forget, their data showed a significant dropoff in employment in only two groups of Dauphin residents: new mothers, who had chosen to use the cash transfer to extend their maternity leave and spend more time with their infants, and “unattached males”—young men who were not married and had no children.

The fact that young men had appeared to work less “seemed to satisfy all the stereotypes people had—that is, if you give people a basic income, these young men are just going to run away from their responsibilities,” Forget said. But after seeking out some of those same “unattached males,” years later, further analysis soon confirmed what she had suspected all along: That the minimum income had, in fact, given their families the economic support to allow them to stay in school a bit longer instead of “dropping out at age 16 and going to get a job in agriculture and manufacturing” in order to help the struggling families stay afloat—an economic reality that had previously left many young men in the working-class town without options.

“Some of these boys stayed in school and graduated and went on to college,” Forget said. “And so when you measure employment outcomes, yeah they worked a lot less—they worked a lot less because they were staying in high school just a little longer.”

Education, Forget points out, is often a key determinant of health and well-being: The more educated you are, the healthier you likely are to be at any age. In addition to the revelation that the guaranteed income had paved the way for better educational opportunities for that group of young men, her analysis of health care system data also uncovered that the entire population that received a basic income had 8.5 percent fewer hospitalizations, relative to a matched control group—for accidents and injuries, but also for mental health issues like anxiety and depression.

American researchers are also investigating the connection between economic precarity and mental health, and have found that economic hardship is likely a leading factor in the recent sharp uptick in suicides, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related "deaths of despair" in the United States.

But just like the creation of more high-quality jobs won’t be enough to stanch the bleeding should our day of reckoning with the robot overlords come to pass, the implementation of a universal basic income won’t be enough to improve national mental health and reinvigorate a beleaguered American workforce on its own.

“People deserve to be able to put food on the table, but they also deserve to make choices and get to pursue passions. It’s about both things.” Foster said. “It harkens back to the labor call for bread and roses—people need both.”


visit this link https://www.vice.com/en_u .. and-themselves
+13   



best
worst
88 comments
 

 2 months ago '15        #2
Prad Bitt 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 7597 7 K  Slaps total: 792 792
Revolution brewing man. The only people against sharing the labor of many are the few that own the labor now.
+19   

 2 months ago '16        #3
KingKPTII 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 3779 3 K  Slaps total: 552 552
Yang 2024

+10   

 2 months ago '08        #4
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
Ain’t reading a that.

Universal basic income will automatically lower the value of money.

Simple as that. I’m all for helping people in need, but giving away “free money” is a pipe dream. I don’t want to hear about Singapore or Norway. That’s an innacurate comparison. Besides, UBI can only survive with capitalism as its blueprint.

It’s not mathematically feasible

EDIT. Actually read up to this part

But while a UBI wouldn’t do away with the need for work entirely, experts say that’s not much of an issue to begin with: People want to work, in part because they derive so much of their social value from it.
This is complete nonsense. Theorizing something off of baseline mere selective anecdotal observation is the worst way to make any form of prediction. This is a perfect example of what a CIO appointed with zero IT knowledge would push onto his staff. Perfect-world a*sumptions and not accounting for adverse outcomes and completely disregarding trends and actual data

However, it did it admit that a basic income is neede for people who need it, but they also need to work but... isn’t that already implemented?


Last edited by flav; 02-18-2020 at 07:37 PM..
-21   

 2 months ago '04        #5
xbossxplayax 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 7241 7 K  Slaps total: 1739 1 K
def need a good chunk of population gone in order for this to be viable with a sustainable balance, no?
+3   

 2 months ago '17        #6
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 flav said
Ain’t reading a that.

Universal basic income will automatically lower the value of money.

Simple as that. I’m all for helping people in need, but giving away “free money” is a pipe dream. I don’t want to hear about Singapore or Norway. That’s an innacurate comparison. Besides, UBI can only survive with capitalism as its blueprint.

It’s not mathematically feasible

EDIT. Actually read up to this part



This is complete nonsense. Theorizing something off of baseline mere selective anecdotal observation is the worst way to make any form of prediction. This is a perfect example of what a CIO appointed with zero IT knowledge would push onto his staff. Perfect-world a*sumptions and not accounting for adverse outcomes and completely disregarding trends and actual data

However, it did it admit that a basic income is neede for people who need it, but they also need to work but... isn’t that already implemented?
But giving it to corporations doesn’t?

+21   

 2 months ago '16        #7
Vagabond 
space
space
space
Props total: 3384 3 K  Slaps total: 265 265
 xbossxplayax said
def need a good chunk of population gone in order for this to be viable with a sustainable balance, no?
Some kind of outbreak or virus would.do that....wait.....
+17   

 2 months ago '17        #8
Lazy 
space
space
space
Props total: 13352 13 K  Slaps total: 1599 1 K
 xbossxplayax said
def need a good chunk of population gone in order for this to be viable with a sustainable balance, no?
Overpopulation is a myth

Most of the world is actually under populated

The greatest concentrations of humans are in China and India

Everywhere else has plenty of land and resources

We just mismanage resources
+49   

 2 months ago '18        #9
MothMan 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 490 490  Slaps total: 117 117
 Vagabond said
Some kind of outbreak or virus would.do that....wait.....
Stay woke my n*gga
+1   

 2 months ago '08        #10
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 one il matt 56 said
But giving it to corporations doesn’t?

“Giving it to corporations” that invest into infrastructures and guarantees added new taxpayers?

There is a reason these are “given to corporations”. Cause there is an exchange made by creating employment. So the calue of money does not lower

Corporations are businesses. A business is in existence to generate money. So yeah money is “given” in forms of deductions which is a form of investment, which is then returned via the process of having more people earning either a higher amount of money, thus paying higher taxes, or new enployees, aka new taxpayers. As a result, the exchange is met

Now i will say that some companies play the system HARD and sometimes abuse it, but that’s not a justification to try to validate a “UBI”. Like i said. This is not mathematically feasible


Last edited by flav; 02-18-2020 at 07:58 PM..
-15   

 2 months ago '17        #11
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 flav said
“Giving it to corporations” that invest into infrastructures and guarantees added new taxpayers?

There is a reason these are “given to corporations”. Cause there is an exchange made by creating employment

Corporations are businesses. A business is in existence to generate money

Now i will say that some companies play the system HARD and sometimes abuse it, but that’s not a justification to try to validate a “UBI”. Like i said. This is not mathematically feasible
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annemarieknott/2019/02/21/why-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-tcja-led-to-buybacks-rather-than-investment/


The TJCA merely put more cash in the hands of companies, triggering a surge in buybacks.



+8   

 2 months ago '08        #12
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 one il matt 56 said
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annemarieknott/2019/02/21/why-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-tcja-led-to-buybacks-rather-than-investment/



So your premise is how capitalism is wrong, then your rebuttal is the Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA) of December 2017

So it was all good until 2017 huh?

Didn’t you read when i said that some will abuse that process and that it’s not a valid argument to support “UBI” ?

Sounds like another case of the Dunning-Krueger effect
-8   

 2 months ago '09        #13
messy marv stan  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x20
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 161041 161 K  Slaps total: 19779 19 K
didnt read....this scheme will eventually lead to a shortage of duckets with no way to replenish what was already spent. its gonna either stop the universal basic income scheme or lower payouts
+2   

 2 months ago '15        #14
Black Larry 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 10108 10 K  Slaps total: 972 972
 flav said
“Giving it to corporations” that invest into infrastructures and guarantees added new taxpayers?

There is a reason these are “given to corporations”. Cause there is an exchange made by creating employment. So the calue of money does not lower

Corporations are businesses. A business is in existence to generate money. So yeah money is “given” in forms of deductions which is a form of investment, which is then returned via the process of having more people earning either a higher amount of money, thus paying higher taxes, or new enployees, aka new taxpayers. As a result, the exchange is met

Now i will say that some companies play the system HARD and sometimes abuse it, but that’s not a justification to try to validate a “UBI”. Like i said. This is not mathematically feasible

Didn't read about the UBI thing. Maybe I'll read later. But corporations are inherently evil. And much of the reason the world is gonna end for much of us. The bigger corporations expose the how corrupt the everyone is. They pollute the world and don't pay taxes. If the corporations paid taxes it really wouldn't be so much debt. It's at least a trillion dollars that should've been paid that wasn't. That should be given back. They put money before ppl.
+5   

 2 months ago '17        #15
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 flav said
So your premise is how capitalism is wrong, then your rebuttal is the Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA) of December 2017

So it was all good until 2017 huh?

Didn’t you read when i said that some will abuse that process and that it’s not a valid argument to support “UBI” ?

Sounds like another case of the Dunning-Krueger effect




Show me where I said capitalism is wrong, plair.

Show me how / where ANY SOURCE that claims UBI eradicates capitalism.
+2   

 2 months ago '08        #16
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 Black Larry said
Didn't read about the UBI thing. Maybe I'll read later. But corporations are inherently evil. And much of the reason the world is gonna end for much of us. The bigger corporations expose the how corrupt the everyone is. They pollute the world and don't pay taxes. If the corporations paid taxes it really wouldn't be so much debt. It's at least a trillion dollars that should've been paid that wasn't. That should be given back. They put money before ppl.
Now that i agree with


The bigger the corporations, the more financial power they have, the more powerful lawyers they have and the more access to loopholes they have

And the large ones can just buy out the smaller companies and make it much mkre difficult for others to compete and prosper
+2   

 2 months ago '08        #17
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 one il matt 56 said




Show me where I said capitalism is wrong, plair.

Show me how / where ANY SOURCE that claims UBI eradicates capitalism.
n*gga,


The entire thread is about capitalism vs UBI are you doing this on purpose? I said UBI will lower the value of money. Your rebuttal was “but giving it to corporations don’t??” Which is your rebuttal against CAPITALISM

I debunked your point by explaining it further, you shift the goalpost on buybacks your rebuttal is from an act passed in 2017. And NO. Buyacks do not lower the value of money

Nice try though like i said. Dunning-Krueger effect in full display


Last edited by flav; 02-18-2020 at 08:16 PM..
-4   

 2 months ago '14        #18
NYSTATEOFMIND 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 4872 4 K  Slaps total: 296 296
The biggest issue that no politician seems to really tackle or have an answer for is the ever rising cost of living. Even if you give me 1000/month, cool but my rent just went up 200 dollars...will UBI match the cost of living?

Citizens wages are flat while the COL grows exponentially...I think internet and cell phones should be considered utilities and there should be cost control as well as cost control on housing, not all housing- if someone wants to pay top dollar for high end living, have at it.
+8   

 2 months ago '17        #19
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 flav said
n*gga,


The entire thread is about capitalism vs UBI are you doing this on purpose? I said UBI will lower the value of money. Your rebuttal was “but giving it to corporations don’t??” Which is your rebuttal against CAPITALISM

I debunked your point by explaining it further, you shift the goalpost on buybacks your rebuttal is from an act passed in 2017. And NO. Buyacks do not lower the value of money

Nice try though like i said. Dunning-Krueger effect in full display

What do you think people will do with UBI, goofy?

You think corporations will stop doing business because their customers have an extra $12k a year to spend?

The article refuted your point that giving tax breaks (money) to corporations results in increased investments and more tax payers. It doesn’t.

Essentially trickle down theory that’s been disproven countless times.

 2 months ago '17        #20
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 NYSTATEOFMIND said
The biggest issue that no politician seems to really tackle or have an answer for is the ever rising cost of living. Even if you give me 1000/month, cool but my rent just went up 200 dollars...will UBI match the cost of living?

Citizens wages are flat while the COL grows exponentially...I think internet and cell phones should be considered utilities and there should be cost control as well as cost control on housing, not all housing- if someone wants to pay top dollar for high end living, have at it.
Your rent went up $200, but the apartment down the street stayed the same to increase their occupancy rates....

This is a boost to capitalism. It’s essentially a year-round tax refund.
-1   

 2 months ago '04        #21
thergs 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 1203 1 K  Slaps total: 482 482
 NYSTATEOFMIND said
The biggest issue that no politician seems to really tackle or have an answer for is the ever rising cost of living. Even if you give me 1000/month, cool but my rent just went up 200 dollars...will UBI match the cost of living?

Citizens wages are flat while the COL grows exponentially...I think internet and cell phones should be considered utilities and there should be cost control as well as cost control on housing, not all housing- if someone wants to pay top dollar for high end living, have at it.
This. In a capitalistic society, the elite will just jack up the prices and you net 0
-1   

 2 months ago '14        #22
NYSTATEOFMIND 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 4872 4 K  Slaps total: 296 296
 one il matt 56 said
Your rent went up $200, but the apartment down the street stayed the same to increase their occupancy rates....

This is a boost to capitalism. It’s essentially a year-round tax refund.
you cant say that for certainty...at the end of most leases or at the end of a calender year- the rent will go up on the apt down the block- meanwhile there is a good chance that renter hasnt gotten a raise or the peanuts s/he got wont stay in line with the the cost of that apt.without dumping 1/3 of that persons check

im lucky...my rent isnt a 1/3 of my income but for people I know- it is

 2 months ago '08        #23
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 one il matt 56 said
What do you think people will do with UBI, goofy?

You think corporations will stop doing business because their customers have an extra $12k a year to spend?

The article refuted your point that giving tax breaks (money) to corporations results in increased investments and more tax payers. It doesn’t.

Essentially trickle down theory that’s been disproven countless times.
Hey goofy, UBI will lower the value of money. The extra $12k per year will dwindle in value

The article didn’t refute “my point” as you seriously fail at reading.

- i said UBI will lower the value if money
- tax breaks for corporations didn’t start in 2017. Your article is about a specific act passed in 2017 which allowed some businesses to perform buybacks. 1) it doesn’t “decrease the value of money” which debunks YOUR rebuttal, 2) the Amazon deal that fell through in NY was a clear example of more taxpayers that would have contributed to NY’s value overall, a tax break in general is an investment made to a company for a return. That’s business 101 , idiot

Lastly

You think corporations will stop doing business because their customers have an extra $12k a year to spend?
Uhhh where in the f*ck did i even imply that?? Insaid the value of money will lower, wtf does that have to do with your projection that “corporations will stop doing business”? Do you even use your head? Stop projecting and address what i said

You debunked yourself with your sheer ignorance, now you argue points that i didn’t even make just so you could blabber more nonsnese

So you’re back arguing against capitalism, where origianlly you supposedly weren’t huh?
-1   

 2 months ago '08        #24
flav 
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 11400 11 K  Slaps total: 3095 3 K
 Eliphas Levi said
Corporations that use the money to buy back their own shares in order to boost their stock price....so that their share holders are happy. They'll avoid investing in research and development in order to accomplish this.
I already mentioned loopholes that corporations are willing to use

So his buyback argument was moot from the jump
+1   

 2 months ago '17        #25
one il matt 56  topics gone triple plat - Number 1 spot x1
space
avatar space
space
Props total: 9386 9 K  Slaps total: 1167 1 K
 flav said
Hey goofy, UBI will lower the value of money. The extra $12k per year will dwindle in value

The article didn’t refute “my point” as you seriously fail at reading.

- i said UBI will lower the value if money
- tax breaks for corporations didn’t start in 2017. Your article is about a specific act passed in 2017 which allowed some businesses to perform buybacks. 1) it doesn’t “decrease the value of money” which debunks YOUR rebuttal, 2) the Amazon deal that fell through in NY was a clear example of more taxpayers that would have contributed to NY’s value overall, a tax break in general is an investment made to a company for a return. That’s business 101 , idiot

Lastly



Uhhh where in the f*ck did i even imply that?? Insaid the value of money will lower, wtf does that have to do with your projection that “corporations will stop doing business”? Do you even use your head? Stop projecting and address what i said

You debunked yourself with your sheer ignorance, now you argue points that i didn’t even make just so you could blabber more nonsnese

So you’re back arguing against capitalism, where origianlly you supposedly weren’t huh?
You typing full thesis papers let’s me know you’re trying to explain to yourself.







Amazon promised 25k jobs but it was over a 20+ year period aka bait and switch.

ADVERTISEMENT
Sign me up
 
 

yesterday...


most viewed right now
-55online now  17
Image(s) inside Bhad Bhabie has completed her transformation to enter the African Amer..
195 comments
2 days ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
+222online now  15
Well, one of us has covid-19.
418 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
+103online now  13
Video inside Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 1990 full movie
70 comments
2 days ago
@movies
most viewed right now
+245online now  6
Looool The sh-t people are wearing as DIY masks has me dead yo!
158 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
back to top
register register Follow BX @ Twitter search BX privacy