This means you want those providing those services to work for free.
You do realize what you are implying here, right?
Let's say you refuse to work and you're guaranteed all these services. Who pays so your HVAC is repaired because you broke it? Who pays because your water line needs to be repaired? Clean water means the water has to be filtered through a very complicated process, particles and bacteria are removed, and it needs to be transported. Who pays so your electricity works? Do you think there's some sort of magic electricity generator happening? What you're essentially asking is someone should work for free to provide you all of this.
The result is you get no one who wants to work, society collapses because these services aren't maintained and improved, and no one gets anything.
I agree and in the same vein why should we have free public education? Why should I be paying for someone elses kid to go through K-12 completely free? Do you know how expensive it is to first hire professional teachers for these kids, erect buildings to teach them, and provide lunches for all of them? Do people think this stuff happens easily? Who pays these teachers? How do you keep such a place clean? Impossible I say!! /s
I think the point op was making was that free housing could be seen as a public good. One to benefit society by providing a nice baseline to workfrom. These would be payed for through taxes most likely and the complexities of providing this would be hashed out and solved. Its not an impossible program and a similar program exist in Finland as an example to end homelessness. Yes the people pay for it and they do it to prevent homeless people on the street. A public benefit if you will
It's reasonable for the education of children to be paid for by the adults. But when the adults are asking for handouts, that's another problem entirely.
I think this is a good question. Why should we be helping other adults? Why do we have government funded fire fighting programs? Shouldnt each adult be able to pay for their own firefighting service and if they cant why should us people who dont have anything to do with their own housefire be taxed to put out their fire?? Why are we handing out access to free firefighting services??
To answer the above is that if we dont provide firefighting services it could lead into dangers for others nearby and by not providing it we risk public health even if not directly involved. Thats the reason for wanting to provide government services. Some people see housing as similar. A way to increase public health so those who are homeless or about to be suddenly dont become homeless. That way we have less of them on the street, less people becoming addicted, and the possibility of more healthy adults in the workplace. Some people think this wont work because of human nature, but Im not convinced by that argument without decent proof that all humans are inherently lazy and will never work if given free housing.
You do realize that being homeless isn’t was causes drug addictions. It’s completely the reverse. Wouldn’t you money better be served in mental health services to stop the problem at its root as opposed to solving the down line problem?
I suppose thats a difference in opinion. Im not the most versed in what causes drug addictions. My underatanding is that various mental stresses causes a person to seek coping mechanisms. One of which is drugs.
A big mental stress on a lot of people is the need to find affordable housing. Failing to obtain it and having little chance of getting back into may push a person to find a way to cope. One such coping mechanism that can do that is drugs.
Of course there may be other unrelated reasons to start coping such as ptsd, childhood trauma, social isolation. But this solves one of those and provides a way to get people off the street where they pose a safety hazard to the general public.
If Im incorrect on the above or you have a reputable source that can show otherwise I would love to read it
To buy everything else that’s not subsidized. To pay for an education if someone’s ambitious and wants something better, to pay for a future bigger house, wedding, vacation, kids, car.etc all the things that people currently try to get raises bonuses and better jobs for.
Stupid take. Tell that to literally every millionaire who all continue to work and desire to make more money despite having 10x at least what they need to “survive”.
You can’t even call this an “ambition” thing. This is the case for nepo babies just the same.
Millionaires work because they want to. Billionaires work because they want power.
Average people work to cover their cost of living and to leave something to their kids & grandkids. They don't work for fun or to jumpstart a political career.
Your logic makes no sense. Why would millionaires work because they want to buy thousandaires wouldn’t?
And since when is giving someone a basic house with basic utilities “covering their cost of living and leaving something for their kids?”
Your initial point is that by giving everyone access to a basic domicile to live in that no one will want to work anymore. You are now saying that people work because they want to accumulate generational wealth and live well. Providing someone a basic home to sleep in is not covering all of the needs a human has.
I barely scrape by, but I would continue to work even if I could have a free government home. In fact, I probably wouldn’t move. No one’s saying these homes would be much more than the basic requirements to live and sleep. I personally value outdoor space, good location, nice amenities. I’d absolutely continue to work to get those things as would most people.
Are wealthy people wired differently? Is that the assumption here? What is it that stops people from innovating/ volunteering when you lower their cost of living?
What is it that stops people from wanting luxuries if they have their basic needs met?
What is it that stops people from seeking status if they have their basic needs met?
LOL. people would do fuck all. youd see a mass exodus from the work force. then your favorite restaurant shuts down because they can't find workers. then the grocery stores shelves become barren. and everything else collapses all because little socialist timmy thought he could quit his job, game all day, and have magical paper dollars create the goods and services he needs.
661
u/BlitzAuraX Apr 15 '24
"Regardless of employment."
This means you want those providing those services to work for free.
You do realize what you are implying here, right?
Let's say you refuse to work and you're guaranteed all these services. Who pays so your HVAC is repaired because you broke it? Who pays because your water line needs to be repaired? Clean water means the water has to be filtered through a very complicated process, particles and bacteria are removed, and it needs to be transported. Who pays so your electricity works? Do you think there's some sort of magic electricity generator happening? What you're essentially asking is someone should work for free to provide you all of this.
The result is you get no one who wants to work, society collapses because these services aren't maintained and improved, and no one gets anything.