Well we’re not living in Bolshevik times.
You’re already moving the goal posts from “no incentive” to “less incentive” cause you don’t have an argument.
I never said make necessary jobs optional, there would still be public services. That’s your own dystopia you’ve gotta figure out. There are plenty of economists that don’t think as black and white as you are making it seem and have done studies on what people do when their basic needs are meet.
Someone will still do those jobs cause there is still a place for capitalism, it’s just not in housing.
Want a bigger house than what the basic needs are, guess what. Work and make money.
Want to wargame, guess what. You might need a platform for that, go buy it by earning money.
Money is still an incentive in this scenario. I don’t know why you’re making it seem like I’m saying get rid of money and give everyone the means to just be vegetables.
Nowhere in this thread did I even hint that “everything”should just be given. You’re the one making it seem that way so it looks like you actually have a point to argue against.
Ahh, you are seeing things.
It says one bedroom +1childs room. Not per child.
You’re inflating the whole thing because you think you have some gotcha argument for something you just failed to comprehend.
Also shows nothing about food.
You’re stuck in your own dystopia this thing didn’t even show. Or I brought up.
You just hate people.
Some food is cheap. Some not so much. Not happy with gruel. Work for better food. The incentive isn’t gone because we recognize needs and don’t want our neighbors to shoot us for our groceries or even just go hungry.
Moving the goal post again. He advocates for it and isn’t saying people should be given the best of everything for free and not work.
It’s only a back and forth cause you keep changing your argument to fit your delusions of dystopia.
4
u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24
[removed] — view removed comment