this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2025
101 points (94.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

36010 readers
1155 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cactopuses@lemmy.world 69 points 1 day ago (5 children)

UBI needs to be combined with rent and price controls if it is not, inflation will eat the benefits inside of a 5-year period and money will be siphoned up the chain.

Otherwise I am all for it.

[–] Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah I talked about that a bit in a previous comment.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nithou@piefed.social 45 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (9 children)

Should be done everywhere and for everyone. Can you imagine a society where you don't have to work just to be able to live? The projects you would pursue, how way less power would bad managers and bosses have? It would also help decentralization from big cities as people wouldn't be forced to move there to get jobs.

Also I never realized the toll finances were taking on my stress and mental health until I reached some kind of financial stability. No one should have to endure that much stress just to be able to live.

[–] Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Sounds ideal

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] brendansimms@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I support it and think it could work. It would make people more happy and free, while removing a lot of unnecessary and expensive bureaucracy from our current welfare system.

[–] Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Id agree, especially with the growing use of AI. I don't think anyone knows fully how many jobs will disappear but we do know it wont/isnt zero.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, I support it. Science has shown the government can afford it and it will save them money in the long run. If society has the resources to ensure everyone's basic needs are met, do it.

The argument against it is that people won't work if they aren't forced to. I think people want to work. This would enable people to have their basic needs met first so they can build a career comfortably.

I believe it should happen and I believe it eventually will happen in Canada, but it will take a lot longer than it should.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago

I'd add that, when you look through history... Every major scientific advancement has been made by people not worried about paying for their daily life.

They had time to think about hard problems

[–] TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago (3 children)

We should not have UBI as that implicitly continues the need for money. Instead we should work towards a world with Universal Basic Resources, or even not so basic resources, if it can be automated.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Currency isn't the problem, and you really need to keep that concept separate from the issues that happen within Capitalism.

Currency is just a convenient method to measure and exchange resources.

Very few people desire an allocated home and weekly rations of flour, chicken, and butter. If you instead give them a list of things they can choose from, and assign ratios and a limit for total resources, all you've done is create a new currency.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Conceptually I'm 100% for it. In reality I'm sure theres going to be unintended consequences that im not seeing.

If it can be made to work like it sounds like it should, we need it and we need it bad.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

Unintended consequences, or just ones you aren't aware of?

There's lots of known things that will happen, both good and bad.

  • A significant de-urbanization would be likely, similar to what we saw with remote work during COVID
  • There would be a drop in certain types of crime
  • A small chunk of the population would become absolute shut-ins, and likely become very mentally unwell
  • Divorce would probably go up
  • The birth rate would likely also go up
[–] Dyf_Tfh@piefed.zip 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Progressive taxation rate that can go negative (aka people can receive money) is more fair.

Could even be easier to implement because it is not only a "social" benefit that cost tax payers money. That could help convince some people.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

That has problems too ….

  • Do you need to work to get your income, because how else you filing income tax
  • income taxes are once per year: what if you have financial disaster after April 15?
  • there’s a needy segment of the population where filing tax forms is unlikely or impossible.
[–] Bunbury@feddit.nl 9 points 11 hours ago

The study results look really promising. I think it would be an amazing thing for society as a whole. I just also think it won’t happen because (some) humans get really bent out of shape when they think others are suffering less than they think they should be suffering.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think that focusing everything on UBI and dismantling all other forms of welfare are going to create massive inequalities in society that few people anticipate.

For instance, I wouldn't be surprised if there are effectively UBI free zones in some major metros with decent economies.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

"UBI Free" doesn't make sense. Everyone gets a UNIVERSAL basic income.

If you mean there would be areas of major metros where people who are not employed cannot live, those already exist.

[–] presoak@lazysoci.al 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's a great idea.

We are the wealthiest culture ever, we can afford it.

It would zero out most crime.

Fighting to survive is beneath us.

load more comments (1 replies)

Yup - I'm for it, in a very specific combination. A universal basic income that is regularly recalculated to ensure that it provides for all basic needs, connected with a flat tax on any income earned through other means and an abolishment of the minimum wage. What it means: taxes become much simpler, the vast majority of people don't need to do them at all. Employers only advertise with net income, so you immediately know what you're getting at the end of the week/month. Since there is no minimum wage (and since one isn't necessary any more due to everyone having their basic needs covered), the economy is more inclusive, since jobs that don't attract as much money but still benefit society like being a musician can be done that much more. Employees have more power since losing their job doesn't mean the threat of losing the ability to afford necessities, meaning they also have a stronger position at the bargaining table.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 8 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Once AI doesn't pan out as the savior of the planet, they'll pivot to go all in on robotics, and lots of people are going to lose jobs. When there's a permanent unemployment rate of 30% or more, society will be faced with 2 choices - UBI, or a reduction in the population.

Which solution do you think each party will embrace?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago

Yes, but it needs to be paired with an aggressive ban on any form of rent-seeking.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 8 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I strongly think we should have it. The money isn't trickling down, so we need to forcibly re-distribute it.

[–] cyberwitch@reddthat.com 7 points 14 hours ago

Of all the capitalists bitching about higher taxes and how UBI will destroy businesses, they keep forgetting that people are more willing to buy shit when they don't have to worry about rent.

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Against both because I'm a communist against income and because its almost always paired with eliminating almost all help programs and with a suggested amount that when those two are combined will arguably make things worse for those in the most need,

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] EldenLord@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

It would make many people more happy and less stressed, so why shouldn’t we do it?

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 6 points 18 hours ago

it would allow me to try earning money or study without worrying about being punished for failing

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 5 points 14 hours ago

My strong opinion is that anyone born into a progressive society is entitled to food, clothing and shelter. The bare minimum you need to survive. There are too many holes in the middle of most towns and cities nowadays with the "Corporation Corners" on the outskirts sucking up all the money that used to flow inward.

[–] SonicDeathMonkey@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I've recently starting thinking about current artists, specifically musicians. A current crop of them come from money. I'll use the example of Gracie Abrams, daughter of JJ Abrams. IMHO, she is definitely talented but she got her leg up from her dad being in the entertainment industry and, more importantly, never had to worry about money. How many other artists and musicians are we not hearing about because they didn't come from money. She is one example of many.

I am a firm believer in UBI. Basic sustenance income should be available to everyone. That wouldn't solve this problem, but it certainly would give a chance for someone with artistic talent to work on their art and while still being able to survive.

[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago

Right now, I'm listening to three very talented young people writing original songs in my garage, who will, even if successful, put in significantly more work for significantly less recognition simply because I'm not JJ Abrams.

I whole-heartedly agree.

[–] angband@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

tax the rich, feed the poor, subsidize birth control.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago

My opinion is that our politicians would prefer fascism.

[–] Broadfern@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It would make reporters stop bitching about the economy and help keep things afloat.

People can buy groceries when they have the money to do so. They may even have a little extra to buy a candy bar, or a gadget or coffee to also boost the economy.

It would allow people to be more productive since stress destroys your ability to function properly.

And most importantly: nobody should worry about a roof over their head or where their next meal is coming from.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MashedHobbits@lemy.lol 4 points 1 day ago (5 children)

It’s shit.

A bandage on top of the festering open wound that is capitalism does not help anyone long term.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

it's definitely better than nothing, but it's more like a mitigation than a solution. it will need to continually chase some sort of cost of living index

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I have two strong opinions about basic income.

I'll be retired and collecting a government cheque lot before we get it in Canada.

I am 100% behind a basic income.

load more comments
view more: next ›