Ask Lemmy

no

I would vote for it, because it seems nice and I don't see myself sitting still regardless, just that I'd choose more fulfilling / societally beneficial work if there weren't this idea of needing to provide and work with market forces. But then it came up with my cousin and she said she'd do fuck all, travel, spend time horse riding or whatnot, anything but work because why bother. Less anecdotal studies show cautiously positive results (or exceedingly positive in misleading headlines until you open the study and find two sides to the coin), but afaik have so far been very limited in both scale and duration. So idk but it seems at least worth a real try. Do we always need to have strong opinions?

No in the current system because it will only lead to inflation, and everything comes from the almighty State exercising economic violence on the common people.

Actually no in general since as an anarchist I believe in tackling the necessities of the people but money isn't a necessity.

I guess I do. I'm mostly in favor but not like super firm about it. Except in the context of as automation reduces the amount of work needed I believe it's one of only a few options without which society is at serious risk. The other main option is to drastically reduce working hours without changing pay to increase number of jobs. I actually prefer the latter.

Nothing against it.

But, there has to be sacrifices for it to work. That being, SNAP and Welfare would have to be axed to make room for UBI. Medicare would remain.

And I would want it available for a certain threshold of earners. Like people who're making $0 - $2,000 a month. If you're well off, then it's not for you.

I'm fine with it but feel it needs to slowly decrease as income goes up. To be clear this cannot have cut off cliffs and should err on the side of recipient. Bit there is no reason to give it to anyone with high income.

If you give it to us, we'll invest it which will fuck with the market or spend it on luxury goods. This all cause inflation that would negate the benefits.

Anyone who really needs it and is spending it all within some reasonable time doesn't have this inflation effect.

Same way people on food stamps don't cause the price of food to go up because they're not using it for excessive spending.

I understand part of the goal is no bureaucracy so I suggest it be part of the tax system. Everyone get it's but it's taxed away for high income earners in a way that is not tax avoidable.

I could also see it being added to the us tax system by simply expanding the child tax credit to include adults. That already has limits built in but that's a lump sum on a tax return so not an ideal distribution.

As a step inbetween industrialization and automatization, i think it's neccessary sometime. But that means also a step from capaitalism to whatever we have then, so even that step will not be easy.

It’s bad because people are selfish. Unless it’s a really low amount, if it’s an amount enough to live, then some people won’t work. That might include me. I’m a rat.

Yes, I think it should happen. But I have no idea how to make it work at a large scale. And I don't think economist know enough to accurately say what will or won't work.

not really, no

It will never happen.

I'm of the opinion that nobody needs it. UBI is a precursor to the CBDC for those who aren't careful (there's speculation on what could be, whether it be a cryptocurrency [stablecoin like Circle or Tether], or something else entirely).

If anything, to avoid that, I'd recommend Jack Spirko's podcast, The Survival Podcast (which is on YouTube and podcast platforms). I'm a regular listener, and while I don't agree with everything he says, he has good points on how to avoid the UBI (doing a trade or freelancing is one way to avoid it entirely).