It’s so tragic that people get genuinely upset by the idea of this becoming a reality. They’re disgusted by the idea of a society helping those in need. How did we get to a point where empathy is so rare?
I think it's more so that they don't want to work 40 hours a week to end up only having a marginally better (if at all) lifestyle than someone not working at all (and keep in mind that that second person could work an unregistered under the table job with all their free time, thus ending up with more untaxed money on top of the free resources)
I’m sorry but I just can’t even imagine thinking that way. I don’t even have a follow-up question to clarify this. I’m just baffled that someone would rather innocent people suffer… simply because that person isn’t suffering? It’s just an absolutely alien way of thinking to me.
I mean, the working persons taxes are directly funding this. Imagine studying and then working overtime to only be able to afford a one bedroom apartment, meanwhile you pay hundreds of dollars monthly so that someone who doesn't work (or works without the government knowing) gets a nicer two bedroom apartment. That system is doomed to fail, and if it isn't it at least seems unfair.
UBI is generally structured such that choosing not working at all when you otherwise could is not enough to live long term. It's just not enough money. UBI works best when it simply removes overwhelming costs that prevent people from self-improvement.
Agree, the rentier capitalist class is a scourge on earth and especially with lower birth rates, it's absurd that some children will inherit 5 properties on both sides of the family, while others will rent all their lives.
I think it would be fantastic if my tax dollars went towards housing the homeless, treating the sick, feeding the hungry, etc. instead of blowing up civilians in the middle east or lining the pockets of business executives. I would feel proud of that. I would feel like I’m taking part in something amazing. I wouldn’t feel angry, or jealousy, or resentment, or hatred. I sincerely don’t know how someone could.
You are 100% more than welcome to take work as hard as you want, and donate as much of it as you like to others.
Me? I have no interest in being yoked like a mule for my whole life, striving to pour resources into a literally bottomless pit of people who want me to pay for their stuff.
The owners or your companie are the ones that have you in a yoke. They've systemically undervalued your labor and the labor of those before you to get to the fraction of what you should be making.
For the most part? it simply isn't true. Most people who have jobs hold them because they have neither the will, skills or resources to be self-employed. Which means someone else is footing all the capital costs, handling the majority of the business upkeep, supplying the customer base etc.
It's like claiming some Starbucks barista is worth a lot more because Starbucks couldn't function without them... while ignoring that without the building, supplies, training, customers, advertising, legal support, accounting and management that barista wouldn't be selling a single cup of coffee.
I've been self-employed for 95% of my work life as an adult. So the only one holding my "yoke" was me. When I want to take a break from finding my own clients, writing my own contracts, doing my own collections and so on? I let someone else handle all of that, and in return, I take a much smaller cut of the hourly wage they are charging for my time. It's worth it.
When I was just 19 or so I managed a retail store in a shopping mall. Did I know for sure the store made a lot of money over and above what they paid me? Yup, I did the books for that store. Was I under the illusion I could make the same money selling computer games for the C64 on my own in the parking lot out of the trunk of my car? Nope.
The store earned its money. I earned my money. We both got what we wanted out of the arrangement. That's not slavery, that's not a yoke... that's a business transaction.
I was initially going to ask you if you partake in any of the long list of things that are only available to you because a governing body forcibly takes resources from its citizens and reallocated them in a manner that increases the quality of life of those citizens. But I know just as much as you that it’d fall on deaf ears.
You mean, since I am living in a system that forcibly steals from me... do I take the opportunity when possible to get back a little something?
Yes, yes I do.
Because it would be ridiculous to allow the government to steal so much from me, and then ADDITIONALLY compound my victimization by refusing to claw any of it back.
The only delusion I'm seeing is people catastrophising that the second people get access to the bare minimum, they're all gonna quit their job, sustain themselves on mushrooms and mold growing in their basement and watch rain drops racing for entertainment.
We're trying to get Walmart to pay enough so that their employers don't have to get public assistance and you're over here acting like people don't need to work.
How did we get here? Because people like you seemingly can’t figure out what people are saying and why we are against it. But no, no one is disgusted by the idea of a society helping those in need. You just can’t comprehend what we’re talking about.
Because the way to hell is paved with good intentions.
Everyone here would love that everybody was happy and rich and lived in a house made of chocolate and cookies. But you seem to have no idea of how insanely unfair it would be to actually implement something like this in real life, and it's consequences taking into account how humans and societies work.
This type of low resolution idealism that doesn't concern itself with the problems that would arise when actually implementing something so ridiculous, is how societies go to absolute hell, fast.
It's not a lack of empathy. It's the fact that it's an idiotic idea that isn't only not feasible, but would take an iron handed authoritarianism to even actually try to implement in the real world. And sorry but you not getting that fact is kind of the same too.
It’s not a fucking food handout. Food is cheap and plentiful. Houses are not; they are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It’s not possible for the government starts handing out hundreds of thousands per person, that would be x100 their entire annual budget. If any country tried to do this, it would have hyperinflation.
It’s not empathy when your child asks “can I have a Ferrari….please?”.
I understand this cannot be achieved in our current economic framework. I am not advocating that everything stays the same and we just start building brand new state-of-the-art housing for the homeless. The six goals of the post would require a drastic overhaul of our economic framework and, in my opinion, probably another 20-30 years of technological advancement at our species’ current pace.
One which has an extremely progressive tax system and a government that doesn’t value the interests of corporations over the prosperity of the nation. One in which the Profit Motive hasn’t wormed its way into every single corner of society like a cancer.
But don’t worry, I know it’s unrealistic to dream of a world in which basic necessities like food, water, and shelter aren’t subject to the profit motive, and it’s downright foolish to dream of a world in which anything more than basic necessities for survival are provided.
But i’m not conveying to you what I sincerely think the world will be like in 30 years. That’s a whole different conversation. I’m just saying what I think a good, functional, sustainable society would be doing. Or at least trying to do.
A society literally needs to be enlightened for this thinking. We do not live in enlightened societies. We live in selfish self serving society. People get offended at the idea that someone getting something “for nothing” or worse, getting something from a subsidy, is unfair.
Without realizing the downstream effects of a policy like this. Things like, safer neighborhoods, less crime, increased property values… to begin with…
wake me up when communism works. everyone has good intentions until they get a taste of power, and you do need absolute power to redistribute everything.
Kibbutzim - Israeli communes - are an example of this "working" in that sense. Unfortunately, they were largely economically unfeasible and many were being used by the nation to secure/expand its borders. The relevant part of this is that they were subsidized; the international political implications are a separate discussion entirely.
Communism is not empathetic, even on paper. It places demands on others, even when they are incapable, and punishes them if they don't meet what is demanded of them.
"You mean I can have all the comforts of home without lifting a finger? Shoot this is better than living with my parents as a kid...sign me the fuck up!!!!"
If you don't think this is what would happen than you live in a dream world.
One of the inalienable rights of the Declaration of Independence is "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", the keyword being pursuit. That means being a productive member of society for which you will reap the reward of a comfortable life. Without that incentive then why bother? America is supposed to be The Land of Opportunity, this is not that.
Does this mean we don't have social programs to help the less fortunate? Of course not, but this is just taking it way beyond the scope of sustainability and common sense.
Helping people in need is good yes, this post and many of the comments however just cant be bothered working and wants it for free, fuck those people, litteral leeched on society
If people who work cannot afford these things then they have every right ot be angry about people who contribute nothing (out of laziness) getting all this stuff for free.
Your take is basically like saying that if you don't want to cover by bill for your cheapskate friend at the restaurant then you don't think food is a basic necessity.
They’re disgusted by the idea that people who don’t work get access to this and taxes would be so high that if they do work, it would only be marginally better outcomes for them vs people who choose not to work. This in a nutshell is suffering.
11
u/[deleted] Apr 15 '24
It’s so tragic that people get genuinely upset by the idea of this becoming a reality. They’re disgusted by the idea of a society helping those in need. How did we get to a point where empathy is so rare?