what's wrong with basic income?
>inb4 gibsmedat
>>78570567
gibsmedat
>>78570567
gibsmedat
>>78570567
>G I B S M E D A T
>I
>B
>S
>M
>E
>D
>A
>T
ficki ficki
Incentivizing not working just makes sense because the rich know they have too much money and love to pay taxes
>>78570567
"If a man will not work, he shall not eat."
"The poor you will always have with you"
![soviet-union[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/IJ75xbd.gif "soviet-union[1].gif")
>state enforced egalitarianism
I feel like we have a word for this already?
>>78570567
Look up who pushes for it the loudest. Tell me again if you think it is still good idea.
>>78571256
What if you are willing but unable.
>state provided income and housing for homeless and whatnot proven to cost less than constantly hounding and arresting them because of crimes they commit to try to have any hope or chance of living
>fuck that, lol gibmedats
>>78570567
risk of bat shit insane HYPER INFLATION
>simple economics
>>78571274
They made it to space first.
>>78570567
What a brilliant idea!
You have a great testbed right there where you live. Why not take this plan to your local politicians and cartel leaders, where the money is, and convince them to put Mexico right at the front of social innovation?
With Basic Income established, you'd stop most of the border jumping and negate the need for any walls. Why, I'd bet that Mexico would be the next generation superpower, and touch would be an internationally renowned Nobel prize-winning superstar in school books for the next five centuries!
Leadership by example, I always say. You first!
>>78570567
>gibsmedat
But unless you have federal price controls, the price of everything goes up accordingly
The western world is overflowing with debt funding existing unsustainable social programs. We'll see interest rates loop back to twelve percent and our fourth winter kondratieff fluctuation. Basic income is an impossible idea right now.
>>78571879
As in having a disability? Having a social net for those have deficiencies is perfectly ok.
>>78570567
Why would I want that when there are much better alternatives?
https://youtu.be/xtpgkX588nM
>>78570567
>the life of one of person, born merely of whim and not of necessity, has inherent monetary value against those who have worked and gained monetary value or those who have helpful skills that give them trade value
Nope.
>>78571274
>muh communism
Not an argument.
>>78570567
niggers make this completely unfeasible. They will still require welfare after spending their basic income solely on marijuana and unnecessary dental prosthetics.
>>78570567
nothing imo
granted, if basic income comes, I will never work again.
but I really like basic income
>>78570567
>IF WE JUST GIVE EVERYONE MONEY NO ONE WILL BE POOR!
Money is just a placeholder for value. Expensive things are only available to the "rich" because the rich have a lot of money to spend on rare and valuable things. If everyone is suddenly able to "afford" these rare and valuable things at the prices needed to buy them yesterday, tomorrow these rare and valuable things (and things in general) will simply be even more expensive.
This leads to something called hyperinflation.
Gravel and seawater are so cheap as to be practically without value, because they are plentiful and not needed or wanted by most people. Gain, fuel oil, cars, furniture, and topsoil command high prices because they are relatively scarce and they have utility.
The things which command value command value because of their scarcity. Making money free doesn't create an inexhaustible supply of things people will want to spend the money on.
I would have assumed this is a troll thread because of what a basic idiot-level of comprehension about economics and human behavior is needed to understand why basic income doesn't create an escape from the laws of supply/demand, but I remembered I know literally dozens of people IRL who, either through ignorance, cognitive failure, or willfully ignoring reality for a utopian idea don't realize this.
tldr nope
It doesn't work unless you have a small, isolated society.
For example it completely falls apart where unsponsored immigration is concerned.
To make it viable it ends up both sacrificing the public service jobs that can monitor proper welfare usage, as well as generally de-incentivising people from workers - either they won't want to work, or wages are so low they don't see it as a valid use of their time even if they did want to do something with their time.
I for one would be a completely useless fuck if I didn't have a constant worklife bringing consistency and order to my life. Work beckons purpose, and it is purpose that makes people happy, not leisure.
Get a fucking job you lazy goddamn nigger.
>>78572109
giving home to people who are homeless because
>they trash homes
>steal from people
>cant not party and trash homes
>wont pay rent
>use home money on drugs
>mommy wont let them smoke cigarettes
ugh, no thanks. We'd a separate fund just put aside for repair and maintenance
>>78570567
1.) the numbers don't add up. If its a big enough payment to live on, it'll cost more money than even heavy-taxing governments can raise. Also that tax burden will have to be on a narrower base since people will leave the workforce
2.) even people very sympathetic to redistribution demand that the recipients work for it. See pic.
3.) to have any chance of making it work, it has to replace a lot of existing entitlements. Which terrifies social-welfare folk, both because they'll lose their bureaucratic turf, and because people will have to be allowed to fail. Blow your UBI payment on drugs and now you can't eat? The state has to say "too bad, you got your help, we won't feed you"
>>78570567
every kind of welfare is demoralizing.
>>78571879
Being disabled =/= Learned Helplessness.
>>78572833
It's literally the same shit, except this is more progressive.
Basic incomes usually assum EVERYONE gets in.
Wit negative income tax only poor people stand to gain
>>78573279
>It's a "/pol/ scapegoats niggers for the economic failures of socialism" episode
>>78570567
>what's wrong with basic income?
this: >>78573345
>if basic income comes, I will never work again.
tl;dr here's what would happen:
>basic income implemented
>tons of people drop out of the workforce
>labor market adjusts, cost of labor goes through the roof
>companies adjust for increased cost of labor
>prices of all goods and services spike up
suddenly everything is expensive and living on basic income isn't so comfortable anymore, so it will have to be raised:
>raise basic income
>cost of labor rises even more
>prices rise even more
it's a self-propagating spiral of inflation. a vicious cycle that will end in total economic disaster and collapse of the currency.
>>78570567
Im all for it. I plan to leave the country anyway might as stuff my coat with free shit before I walk out the door.
>>78570567
Well, if you're giving out money every month to every single person just for the simple fact that they exist you're probably going to do wonders to devaluate your nation's currency
>$3000 for a used car? Dollars a fucking worthless! Everybody gets them mailed from the federal reserve now
>>78573953
It's worth noting that second option of paying for someone to be incarcerated at least generates prison guard jobs. Many a rural man across the country might not have a way to make a living if there wasn't always an endless supply of failed Nigger drug dealers to keep contained.
Hell maybe were looking at Obama's immigration agenda all wrong. Maybe it's a job stimulus plan, and all the refugees are intended to keep our Prisons full. lol
>>78573507
>>78570567
what a bunch of crap. How is gibsmedat related to saving the planet? And why the fuck planet needs saving?
I think basic income is an egalitarian idea if you take out all the other programs and streamline bureaucracy. Who needs thousand of welfare employees if we just give everyone money.
>>78570567
It's a poor bandaid fix for a society that is quickly moving towards currency being obsolete. Unskilled labor is no longer necessary in places with sufficient infrastructure, and as technology proceeds, the threshold of labor that is too complicated for machines will constantly rise. We're passing the point where there are more people than there are jobs for them to do, and our currency based societal model breaks down.
The biggest issue is that currency is the means by which the elite accrue power. It is their tangible base. Those in control require it, and the rest of us require its end. The only way this can be resolved is bloodshed.
>>78570567
Theft is not a source of income.
>>78570567
the problem is that they are trying to find a way to profit from it by using the current monetary system instead of just getting rid of the system and physical wealth all together
real basic income is a lot more drastic and charitable than anyone currently assumes it is
>>78570567
Doesn't work unless you have a post-poverty economy to start with.
Billionaires wont let you do that. They will hide money in lowtax countries.
One solution is to confiscate their money and shoot them, but then you risk being called sjw, oh the terrible destiny.
>>78572340
They also lost the Cold War 1st
>>78571879
There will always be some work available no matter your disability. If you're too disabled to work, then you're a waste of resources and should die.
>>78570567
>giving everyone welfare and putting a candy wrapper on it
Gee I wonder whos gonna pay for it?
>>78576467
why is the only solution of the far left "shoot the people we don't like and steal their stuff"?
>>78570567
Not feasible yet.
At some point, probably in the second half of this century, technology will advance enough to allow fully automated production and distribution of all goods necessary for human survival. When human labor becomes redundant, basic income and free education for everybody will be the next logical steps.
Until then, basic income is basically theft.
>>78576838
I'm not left. I just want criminals in jail or punished. For some reason people on far right dont want rich criminals punished....
>>78574049
What the fuck happened to your cross, Greece? Did you sell it to help pay demnbts?
More forced under the radar sterilization seems more practical
Basic income should only be a thing when we have robots doing the majority of the labor.
Because you can't just give people money you drooling retard, that doesn't fucking fix anything. That money has to come from somewhere. Why should I lose money from my paycheck so Sharqueesha can take her 17 kids to McDonald's?
Socialism - Nobody's poor if everybody is!
>>78570567
Because someone has to do the dirty jobs no one wants to do... because they're dirty, involve hard work, and provide none of the social status signaling that the Lois Vutton buying commercialism says you should seek.
In short, why would anyone do the dirty jobs if they didn't have to? It's not feasable, until PERHAPS, robots can completely take over the workforce and humanity can final live a life of leisure, should they so desire.
>>78575774
>instead of just getting rid of the system and physical wealth all together
Literal Communism.
Alan Watts gets it. Right, guys?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhvoInEsCI0
>>78577060
Owning more stuff than someone else isn't a crime in a legal or moral sense. Stealing and killing are.
>>78570567
>poor people ask for houses
>Goverment give free houses
>POOR PEOPLE COMPLAIN
Now think
>poor people asks for money
>money not enough for new Iphone
>POOR PEOPLE COMPLAIN
Look at the niggers in USA they complain about the welfare and food stamps despite being free, look at the muslims they complain they "can't get a decent job" or decent "free food".
Poor people will complain, and won't act to help themselves.
We're not ready for it. It's too soon.
But mark my words, it will be adopted around the world in the future, in some form or another. When virtually every job can be automated (and it will happen before that) society will have no choice but to develop some kind of basic income.
>>78577505
I'm talking about those that steal by avoiding taxes through loopholes and lowtax countries. Also those who move businesses to low paid worker countries.
ALL CRIMINALS and traitors, hence need to be shot.
Anyone that earn their money though honest work can keep it.
>>78577370
>In short, why would anyone do the dirty jobs if they didn't have to?
This is why UBI is a good idea. It actually lets the free market determine wages instead of either minimum wage regulations or "I'll starve and die if I don't do it"
Shit, dirty jobs that are hard work would have to be better paid if UBI is a thing. The value of people's labor to do that job increases, so the wage would natrually increase to the point that it would be worth it to some worker. It also would increase motivation to automate, as instead of paying the higher wage, businesses could invest in automation to simply get rid of the job altogether.
>>78577403
Burning money has literally zero affect on the the total amount of WEALTH in the world; it only changes that particular individuals access to it.
Money is literally the concretization of the abstract, a medium by which energy is transferred from state state into material possessions and actions.
It is literally the IDEA that you can transform energy into paper, without it being anything but paper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMkkfuSizc4
>>78577878
Another country offering lower taxes to attract businesses, or other workers being willing to work for less money than you are, is just the other side of the competition among businesses that has brought you a high standard of living.
Raging that someone else is willing to do the same for less, and threatening to shoot anyone who takes them up on it, is just being childish. Lower your price, or be so much better that you're worth the extra money. If you don't do that and try to force people to pay you more than the market price for your labor, you shouldn't be surprised when they devote their energy to getting around your restrictions.
>>78570567
Ask yourself why a direct democracy like Switzerland voted against it.
It's a magnet for niggers.
BASIC INCOME
PROS:
>People do not have to pretend to be helpless in order to get aid, so they can become productive without fear of taken away welfare.
>People can pay their own food, medical care, etc. No need to provide "free" services by the state, which are often ineffective
>People can study a career without having to quit because lack of money
>People can write books, produce music, art, videogames, without worrying about money and paying bills.
CONS:
>Potential state's debt skyrocket = Defaulting = No more basic income = mass poverty & chaos
>No urgency to work = more expensive workforce = inflation
>Too much inflation can render basic income useless, not enough to live. It's like having no income at all = mass poverty & chaos
>Expensive country = Lack of competitive (can't export) = Economy is ruined ? = mass poverty & chaos,
Cons are too big, we're talking potential Mao & Stalin type mas starvation.
>>78570567
As an alternative to welfare, I have no strong opinions either way, but it has to be tested in other countries before it's universally adopted.
>>78576467
Sven, has it ever occurred to you that Fiat currency is actually not worth anything at all?
>>78578353
You've been bluepilled to high heaven.
Globalism's end game is what? It's that everyone is payed on the level of a chinese or vietnamese and only a 1000 trillionaires control the world.
That's not something I agree with, and it's not very patriotic either.
Protectionism is great. We need more of it.
Getting rid of ALL (ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING) forms of welfare and replacing it with basic income for every adult citizen (absolutely no extras for shitting out babies) with an opt-out option for those who work, would be a great idea.
The only problem is that many people are terrible with money and will demand more gibs
Help me find something wrong with this
>>78570567
Niggers and other ethnically challenged people will make a culture out of living on it. Then again, they do that already with other handouts. Maybe the solution is just to get rid of niggers.
Basic income will not become viable until automation has progressed far enough to support massive amounts of people not working. Obviously it will only work with strict immigration, too.
>>78576533
>There will always be some work available no matter your disability
What fucking planet do you live on? It's hard enough for non-disabled people to get (non-shit) jobs, and they're only going to get scarcer with automation.
>>78571274
basic income is not communism. It's anti communistic, since it only increses state intervention, and safeguards the capital
If you introduce Basic Income I will just quit my job and watch anime all day.
Why is Basic Income good for a society again?
>>78579344
Exactly... people love to go in debt, consuming more than they can afford, causing inflation, and then not being able to pay their debt back...
Then blame banks and capitalism for having the stuff they didn't earn taken away.
Basic Income would only encourage this even more. And once people have 70-80% of their basic income consumed by debt payments... and the inflation made the remaining 20% absolutely worthless... what are they going to blame?
>>78579344
>Getting rid of ALL (ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING) forms of welfare and replacing it with basic income for every adult citizen (absolutely no extras for shitting out babies) with an opt-out option for those who work
So you discourage both working and having children. Yeah, seems like a great way to run a country.
>>78570567
>gibsmedat
>>78579995
>discourage
Well no. Basic income cant be on the level of paying job. It has to be much lower.
>>78570567
>gibsmedat
>>78579836
because most people aren't degenerate NEETs already like you
most normal people would still want to work, because living off of whatever a basic income is would be a pretty sad life. You'd get by, yes, but really no money for hobbies, travel, saving for an actual house or car etc.
>>78576467
>Billionaires wont let you do that.
They are the ones that will push for it.
In the future the choice will be basic income of socialism
>>78579995
>Not even ironically
Having kids in exchange for welfare is a horrible incentive to have children.
People's encouragement should be feeling ready to have children, and wanting to pass on best you've got to next generation
>>78579392
A job is a job. Just because you're delusional into thinking you're entitled to a 12 figure salary does not mean you will get one.
>>78580511
>People's encouragement should be feeling ready to have children, and wanting to pass on best you've got to next generation
Yeah and that leaves you with a birthrate of 1,2 and about 2 million economical refugees.
>>78570567
The idea is to replace other social services with basic income. No free health care, no food stamps, no section 8 housing.
Now what do you do when LaVontayvius and De'Antoniandareesha spend all that on shoes and hair products and suddenly are out of money for the week? They have no other income, they ran out of food and there's no other subsidies.
>>78580174
>Basic income cant be on the level of paying job. It has to be much lower.
>It has to be ,much lower then current minimum wage
>>78579836
>I'm a worthless autistic neet
>therefore everyone is like me
Jobs will become much rarer. So they will simply cut hours.
I wouldnt mind working as a programmer for 20 hours a week, and save the rest to my social life and posting on interweebs
>>78580681
Then what you propose?
Bringing in millions of rapefugees will increase the tax burden and make the native population's birth rate plummet even more.
However, Japan's birthrate has been steadily increasing in the past few years due to a government policy. Is there a nip around here that could explain to use as an example?
>>78580511
>People's encouragement should be feeling ready to have children, and wanting to pass on best you've got to next generation
How autistic could you be? Children always were economical bargain, you fucking retard.
>>78581094
that's the fundamental problem of all safety-net programs. If you don't let people fail, they realize it quickly and have no need or desire to get off benefits. They won't be responsible because they know someone else will always pick up the tab. If you do let people fail, you have to be deliberately hard-hearted and let some people die because they made bad decisions.
its the same principle as financial bailouts, really.
>>78579392
>automation
Underestimating exponential expansion (Moore's Law) of workforce, is as dangerous as overestimating it.
There's no guarantee most jobs will be automated in just a few decades.
Moore's Law is not a scientific prediction.
At any given time Moore's law had never been guaranteed for more than a few years...
It has been only proved right by a series of technological breakthroughs... which is like being saved by the bell.
We've reached the limit again.
Right now obstacles are heat dissipation and not being to reduce transistor size, probable among others. It is expected to find way to improve but not close to sustain Moore's law.
Hope's on Quantum computers, but right now do not offer any guarantee of success. It can only operate at temps close to zero, it's very unstable and expensive and unpractical.
You can't just take for GRANTED we'll figure out how to make that thing work in the next 10 to 20 years.
>>78570567
gibsmedat.
>>78580497
it's already started
the silicon valley rich already are figuring out that a UBI = more money for them and their ilk. We live in a consumption economy, and poor people having more money will always increase demand, particularly for consumer products. In the end the billionaires know they'll be taxed higher, but the increase of profits from more people buying their products will offset this.
>>78570567
Probably better than benefits if it's tied to GDP and not able to be raised to a higher percentage. People would spend their money way more efficiently than the government.
>>78580681
1,2 is only because people who take having children seriously... have to pay more and more welfare for people who do not take children seriously aka have 10 and don't give a shit.
/pol/ is clueless and i suspect their tone will change once they realize how close automation is and how it's going to royally fuck their shit up.
blue-collar and service sector /pol/fags don't realize that they're going to be unemployed nigger-tier GIBMEDATS in 20-30 years unless they own capital in the form of robots/automated machine workers
basic income is pretty much all but an inevitability at this point
>>78573507
>>I'm a worthless autistic neet
>>therefore everyone is like me
>poortugal in charge of reading comprehension
As of soon one year I am working as an engineer for one of the biggest companies in Germany.
If I get free shit without working why would I keep my job? If they really Introduce Basic Income I will just quit. Or rather, I would move to another country where the people are still sane.
>>78581485
Encourage children by all means necessary. It sucks because a bunch of women will just pop out children for a living without bothering to raise them properly, but that is still better than the birthrate we have right now.
Hell unlike most of /pol/ I don't even mind immigration, just don't take in people who are only in it for the welfare and instead take in educated people. There are enough people from China or even inside the EU that want to come here. Take them instead of those fucking rapefugees.
>>78581723
>I am a worthless NEET that loves to be a muncher to others. Also my parents fucking hate me and wished i died
>Therefore everyone is like me and is just waiting for the day they aren't forced to work to watch anime all day
Do you have anything to back up your claims? Concrete stuff, not conspiracys
>>78582258
You know that someone has to develop, program and build these robots too, retard?
>>78582360
meant to quote >>78581472
>>78570567
https://youtu.be/xtpgkX588nM
>>78582514
Yes, but not everyone. There's no point in automation if you have to pay one individual to create and service every robot anyway. Automation will kill tons of jobs, regardless of the new jobs it creates.
>>78582012
Exactly, and more, it will be a choice betwenn life and death, once unemployemment hits critical levels.
>,2 is only because people who take having children seriously... have to pay more and more welfare for people who do not take children seriously
No, it's becasue it's not finacially advisable in today world. Also culture and contraceptives
>>78582514
Someone does. but a.) its a lot fewer people than are needed to do it the non-automated way, and b.) once they've built their AI or robot, more can be built easily, and they require only a little maintenance, which is also easily done by a small number of people.
It's the same way that once upon a time you needed ten thousand unskilled workers to run a car factory. Now you use 100 mid-skilled workers and a bunch of robots, and the factory turns out more cars.
There'll always be new jobs being created for high-skilled workers. Unskilled labor is the part that's going to be automated out of existence.
>>78581472
>wouldn't mind awesome life
I wouldn't mind it either, but it's not so easy.
What if your basic income causes inflation, and then your basic income isn't enough?
Just keep raising basic income endlessly? So hyper inflation? That's like a county becoming an hero economically.
>>78582360
>If I get free shit without working why would I keep my job?
You wouldnt have too. You could live a Neet life, or work for an extra money. It would be your choice. If you didn0t want to work, others would take your job don't worry
I mean, there are people who work dozens of hours a week for something they don't get any money from, and you guys have a hard time comprehending why would anyone work in a basic income paradigm
Must be the autism
>>78572985
To piggyback on this: To initiate UBI In the United States would require a massive population decrease, possibly a two kid policy, as well as even tougher immigration laws because advertising that you can basically get paid to exist is going to be attractive to foreigners.
>>78582514
Yes, those people will be the last to lose their jobs, at which point we're pretty much at the singularity.
Still doesn't account for hundreds of thousands of white collar jobs that are simple enough to be replaced by a machine learning pipeline.
>>78570567
>and mexico will pay for it
>>78582514
>Germany will need 60 millions robbot programmers and repairers
>>78583165
> but it's not so easy.
I don't defend a basic income tommorrow, or next year. It will come once automation kicks in seriously. Prolly in the next decade or 2.
>What if your basic income causes inflation
Why? In this point there will be industries that will operate virtually without human labour.
The economicall paradigm would be much different
>Hyperinflation
Where are you getting this shit? mises?
>>78583231
Naturally UBI would be available only to citizens
>possibly a two kid policy
>Yes good goy, let the mexicans and nigger breed for you good goy. Menawhile you must work hard to maintaim them
>>78570567
HEY OP.
BETTER FUCKING IDEA RIGHT HERE.
HOW ABOUT WE PAY EVERYONE A MILLION DOLLARS AN HOUR?
NOBODY WILL EVER BE POOR AGAIN!!!!
Too expensive
>>78579615
You're dumb
>>78579615
You again?
>>78583992
>>78582258
there will still be the market for art of various types, like stories, movies, paintings, games.
actual abstract things with a soul in them, not the bullshit ai-made filters people call 'art'
>>78570567
Real wealth would vanish. You'd have lots of money but nothing to buy.
>>78582360
>engineer
So you would either make about 80k or six figures by working, or a measly ~12k by just living on basic income. Why the fuck would you want to quit?
>Hell unlike most of /pol/ I don't even mind immigration, just don't take in people who are only in it for the welfare and instead take in educated people. There are enough people from China or even inside the EU that want to come here. Take them instead of those fucking rapefugees.
I think most people here agree. There's nothing wrong with immigration if the people coming in are educated have a compatible culture and wish to work. It's what we had here in the States before the immigration reform (before the reform, most immigrants were from Europe and educated), then everything went to shit with most immigrants being third-worlders, which the Democrats love because they're pretty much guarantee to vote for more welfare.
