Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

berlinparisexpress OP t1_jbpls9x wrote

Just interested in everyone's thought on the topic.

I've been thinking about this on the way to work lately and I just don't think anyone hates working per se - they hate selling their time and obeying to arbitrary orders. Giving a hand to move a friend's home is often super fun and rewarding - why? It's shared work on a voluntary basis that feels super useful with a clear goal that is achievable by cooperation.

So yeah, I would definitely still work on a UBI, but I would definitely think about work differently, ands I think this is what universal income is all about. I might work more locally, take more risks or be more involved in causes I truly care about. I don't like feeling useless and I don't think most people would become lazy because they suddenly earn a guaranteed 700$ a month.

What are your thoughts on the matter? What would you do with a guaranteed income every month, no matter your situation?

6

Jasrek t1_jbsftza wrote

If my basic needs and wants were met, I would absolutely stop working. I'm hoping to retire in about 6-7 years and then never work again. Some people in my same situation are already talking about how they'll get another job to 'keep busy'.

I'll keep busy, but I'm not going to work. I can be plenty busy by reading, playing video games, watching Netflix, spending time with pets, and sleeping in on weekdays.

That's exactly what I would do with a guaranteed income that covers my basic needs. Now, $700 a month would not be that. That honestly would not really change my life at all, though I know it would for many people.

But it wouldn't erase my need to work in order to support myself financially, even though I have no inherent interest nor desire to work.

1

ObscureName22 t1_jbtdyx6 wrote

I think it’s naive to assume everyone would keep working at the level needed to maintain our society. The article mentioned it, but didn’t offer any good solutions to the “menial, but necessary” jobs problem as they put it. Their suggestion was that employers would have to offer extra benefits to get employees to work more.

The issue is that in my experience people are never going to work more than they have to. All those low-paying jobs that most don’t like doing affect my day-to-day life many times more than the ones with free thought which people would be more drawn towards if they didn’t have to worry about their finances due to a universal wage. Not everyone may hate their jobs but there are many jobs that no one would do without a good incentive. I think most people underestimate how much those employees are needed as well.

One day technology may take away so many jobs that we will be forced to pay a universal wage so people can survive. Until then I think it goes without saying that supplementing people’s income will cause at least some, if not a lot of menial laborers to work less which will directly impact our society.

1

Jasrek t1_jbwa2sg wrote

> The article mentioned it, but didn’t offer any good solutions to the “menial, but necessary” jobs problem as they put it.

Automation?

1

AllGodsRTricksters t1_jc0c00d wrote

The pandemic showed us that a lot of work is essential, but not a lot of it has pay that reflects that.

Pay menial but necessary labour at a rate that recognizes its value.

1

Beat-the-heat t1_jc1uyx3 wrote

Generally speaking the top 40-50% of income earners will pay almost all income tax; UBI would need a massive tax increase, more likely the state becomes less democratic as the middle class sides with the rich to avoid the tax burden.

1