7 Questions for UBI Proponents

hisich wrote: IMO, the terms are basically interchangeable. Govts. are, indeed, corporations. Groups of individuals operating as fictitious entities.

If governments are corporations as you mentioned, then isn't your fight ultimately against capitalism?

The cringe factor here is above the charts. You've been harassing people for some time now in an open, friendly environment, and then expect us to fulfill your confirmation biases? You don't agree with UBI, that's cool, well then it's time to move-on and start proposing better solutions instead of draining people's chi like a vampire.

shamangineer wrote: Do you pay taxes? Carry a driver's license? Pull over for the red and blue? Sorry If I don't live up to your high standards of purity.

Care to tell me what makes spontaneously-organized aligned self-interest so much more practical than democracy? Or perhaps why you are red color-blind?

Maybe you will say why you haven't gone to Galton's Gulch to get away from all us libtard moochers?
https://panampost.com/adriana-peralta/2014/09/04/galts-gulch-chile-libertarian-paradise-turned-nightmare/

Democracy was the best idea the Oligarchs ever came up with...it provides the illusion of freedom to their Serfs...

enjoypolo wrote: If governments are corporations as you mentioned, then isn't your fight ultimately against capitalism?

The cringe factor here is above the charts. You've been harassing people for some time now in an open, friendly environment, and then expect us to fulfill your confirmation biases? You don't agree with UBI, that's cool, well then it's time to move-on and start proposing better solutions instead of draining people's chi like a vampire.

If your fight is against capitalism, and if govts. are corporations, isn't your fight ultimately against govt?

The cringe factor of people who consider themselves "outside-the-box thinkers" supporting an idea (UBI) that actually INCREASES the power of the Oligarchs/Rulers is off the charts.

I started a thread which people are free to engage in or not...if you consider that "harassment" you're probably a Millenial Snowflake & need to GTFO!

shamangineer wrote:

I'm guessing you are one of those people who are not overly encumbered by a need to reflect on your actions.

shamangineer wrote: I'm guessing you are one of those people who are not overly encumbered by a need to reflect on your actions.

Yeah...stick to trying to transmute water into wine or whatever it is you do...politics/economics/philosophy just isn't your thing, kiddo...

hisich wrote: As the Establishment & its political puppets continue promoting the idea of UBI--for surely nefarious reasons--I wonder how all of the self-styled 'rebels' who think they're being anti-Establishment by promoting the Establishment policy of turning us all into children who receive an allowance from the Establishment would answer these Q's:

1. Who is going to administer this program, if not the corrupt Establishment currently in charge?

2. Are there any limits as to who is allowed to collect this 'free' money, i.e., will a World Ruling Class re-distribute wealth to everyone on Earth, will individual nations do it only for their own citizens, do you dummies think 1st World nations can simply absorb all the billions of poverty-stricken 3rd Worlders into their nations, etc...?

3. What do you propose doing to people who don't want to participate--on either the receiving or giving end?

4. Do all of the current unsustainable, failing, severely-underfunded, UBI-ish, bankrupt, something-for-nothing programs that already exist (public & private pensions, economic &medical welfare programs, school/college subsidies, artificial make-work jobs/useless admin, etc.) not give you any pause regarding your even more ambitious "Free Shit For Everyone" utopian fantasies?

5. We put signs up in nature areas telling people not to feed the animals (i.e., give them 'free' stuff), as it will promote dependence & degrade their ability to fend for themselves. Why does the same principle not apply to humans (do all the MILLIONS of people getting 'free' shit now live particularly useful or purposeful lives--go to a housing project & get back to me!)?

6. After you ensure everyone can live for 'free', how do you deal w/reproduction...will people be allowed to have as many children as they want or will the Ruling Class act as cattle farmers who direct human reproduction?

7. Lastly, since y'all are SO concerned about the poor/needy, I'm sure that you, as pampered 1st World suburbanites surrounded by abundance, ALREADY give significant portions of YOUR OWN incomes to FAR worse off people living in truly impoverished conditions in the 3rd World, yes...?

Probably not a great idea to jump in, but hey I'm new around here, and have been advocating UBI for many years ...

The questions seem pretty misanthropic to me - all assume 'we' or actually maybe just you, are caught between a monolithic horrible elite, and a mogodonish populous. If it's all so bleak, where do you want to go, what's your plan?

For sure there's a horrible elite, but I'd argue that it's still made of humans, and they are not all horrible, neither do they all agree. As far as the mogodonish populous is concerned, there's obviously no way to argue otherwise here: you either believe people are fundamentally stupid, lazy and brutish, or you feel that all are fundamentally smart, active and good. Or, you may think that humans have the potential to be both, sometimes at the same time. UBI is a demand which emphasises the better nature in both the elite and populous. To me it is as much part of a perspective that demands we all look after each other as it is a particular policy, or collection of policies.

1. Yes at the moment we're stuck with the corrupt Establishments to administer it, although in the past few years there have been a multiplicity of proposals to use blockchain technologies to distribute it less centrally, based on circles of trust. Cf: https://duniter.org/en/
While these are interesting and in some cases gaining in effectiveness, I still campaign for the Borg to cough up the dough in the meantime. While I have no doubt they'll try to manipulate a state-paid UBI for their nefarious ends - if we manage to carve out an individual, cash-based UBI it would still be a strike for freedom, since cash is at the moment the main way most people experience what little freedom they have.

2. Well, there are UBI movements in over 50 countries in the world, mostly directed for practical reasons at their own governments, and making proposals which cover their own citizens or residents. On this link you can find the 37 groups who have affiliated with the biggest international organisation, Basic Income Earth Network. There is also World Basic Income, which yes is advocating a global UBI from global environmental and resource taxes. You won't like that one maybe, but they do have interesting proposals. The likelihood as I see it is that UBI will start somewhere in the global south, since it'll be cheaper and there's less resistance from welfare-state defending groups since there isn't much other welfare.
And in terms of migration, all the research shows that people generally move country out of either economic or physical necessity arising from conditions at home, not because they think they'll find much more than a job and peace in the places they move to. To my mind the imperial north owes a lot of dues to the countries it's been ripping off for the past 400 years, so we have a duty to welcome anyone who makes it here. On this it might be preferable to change all foreign aid to UBI so it doesn't just end up lining the Swiss bank accounts of corrupt officials.

3. All would receive UBI as symbolic of their humanity, and/or citizenship. If someone doesn't want it, there's nothing stopping them from giving the money to something they want to support. The rich will generally pay far more in taxes than they'll get in UBI, but it's also a mistake to assume that money is distributed equally or even fairly within wealthy families, so individuals in their households could benefit in terms of safety and independence. The other side of the equation, taxes, are still a thorny issue which needs reform. For the past 40 years taxes have been increasingly laid on people who have to work for their money, and have been steadily withdrawn from the 'free money' the rich already enjoy in terms of inheritance, corporate dividends, royalties on intellectual property. To my mind this is what needs to be targeted. Funny how they keep telling us how they want to encourage us to work, while they tax it more and more...

4. UBI is nothing like those programmes you list. It is more like a universal dividend, since to get it you don't have to prove to a welfare office what you do/how poor you are/who you're sleeping with (or not). A right is quite different from something you have to beg for, cf: research showing that people who had been on unemployment benefits become much happier and involved with society once they become old enough to get a pension.

5. UBI treats people like adults, in the sense that yes everyone can decide what to do with it for themselves. In that sense it's nothing like throwing food to zoo animals, since all they can do is to eat it. If people decide to sit around drinking beer all day, so be it. There are a lot of jobs which either don't need to be done at all, or are actively damaging to people and the environment. All the research shows however that most people want to be actively involved with others around them, and more than that, contribute something like double GDP in care and other voluntary work anyway. With money people do a lot of different things, both for themselves, their communities and environment. In kind, or conditional welfare generally assumes the worst of people, UBI assumes the best.

6. All the research into birth rates globally shows that more economically secure women feel, the fewer children they have. A case in point is the UK, where child benefit used to be paid unconditionally to the main carer (usually the mother) for every single child up to the age of 16 or 18 if they stayed in school. The birthrate steadily dropped until 2010, when it started to be means tested, and a two-child limit set, now it's going up again.

7. This isn't a question, it's an accusation. Most people do what we can for others within the limits of our pockets/time/ability, whether they live close to us, or further away. If you think UBI supporters are just making a selfish claim on their own governments at the expense of other people around the world, think again. Better yet, do some research.

Anyway I don't expect to convince you, since you don't seem to like anybody very much, and I can't imagine any demand on the state you'd support or think more than hopeless. I've posted this for those who do have real questions, and to support the patient replies by @shamangineer and others. Namaste

Glad I read through before commenting. OP is looking for an argument, not a debate.