We worry about providing Universal Basic Income because people might stop working, but here's a thought: maybe, just maybe, with a little financial security, people might actually pursue work they truly choose rather than work to just not die. Imagine that world for a moment.
🇳🇱
As someone who is strongly against UBI, and strongly supportive of welfare I can earnestly say people simply not working is not at all the reason I (or most people against UBI in my opinion) are against it.
The reason i am against it is because it causes people more harm than good. People who are in a position where they need assistance need to be given the tools to get out of their situation, and the help to get there needs to be conditional on this (and we should be spending the money that goes with that). Financial assistance should be conditional with mandatory job training or mental health therapy needed to help someone succeed, not just money.
In fact when there are underlying bad habits, as can often be the case, it is possible money can even make a persons condition worse and cause them to sleep farther into poverty.
@freemo @scottsantens Rubbish. This is nanny-state stuff. The best tool IS money. The best person to decide their needs and priorities is the person themselves - see homeless people that were given UBI.
Your claims might apply *only* to the few with mental health/incapacity issues. Not people in general.
And job training for what? Whatever you say?
People should have the choice to engage in that or not. Some people might actually need time away to recharge or address their own wellbeing.
> Rubbish. This is nanny-state stuff.
Giving people help is "nany state stuff" regardless. I'd rather an effective nanny than an ineffective one.
> Your claims might apply *only* to the few with mental health/incapacity issues. Not people in general.
No, poor people generally have poor skills that contribute strongly to their situation, some combination of lacking marketable skills or having poor financial hygene (which is also a skill).
> And job training for what? Whatever you say?
Training for high paid work, in that i include high education, trade schools, and even training in the arts
> People should have the choice to engage in that or not. Some people might actually need time away to recharge or address their own wellbeing.
If thats what you need then thats why I include psychiatry int he list of things that one may need to do instead of job training. if a licensed therapist says you need it I dont mind that help being provided, but its too easilya bused otherwise.
@freemo @scottsantens Giving people money to make their OWN choices is not nanny stuff - forcing YOUR POV on them is.
Ineffective? Go read. There are NUMEROUS studies showing the effectiveness of a UBI. This claim is fatuous and without foundation.
Your evidence is all in your head.
As for psychiatry? Seriously?
Poor skills? BS. SNOB! THERE AREN'T ENOUGH JOBS FOR EVERYONE & JOBS ARE DIMINISHING.
PEOPLE IN WORK ARE IN POVERTY BECAUSE OF LOW PAY!
YOU BLAME PEOPLE FOR THAT?
Get in the sea.
@freemo @scottsantens You'd have a massively pedantic, bureaucratic and MORE COSTLY system than just giving people money.
There's no abusing that, no unnecessary oversight, let adults be adults. At the very least, they are better placed to be consumers, helping money cycle, instead of being faced with starvation, as your inhumane system would have it.
> You'd have a massively pedantic, bureaucratic and MORE COSTLY system than just giving people money.
Costs more per person, short term. Costs less long-term as it actually solves the problem and thus doesn't require and infinite firehouse of money lasting forever into the future.
There is no doubt UBI is cheaper per person, but not cheaper for society overall, in fact it is far more costly by not solving the problem.
> There's no abusing that, no unnecessary oversight, let adults be adults. At the very least, they are better placed to be consumers, helping money cycle, instead of being faced with starvation, as your inhumane system would have it.
When adults are "adults" they dont need financial support from a nanny state. If they need support then they already arent capable of being adults. Which is fine, but instead of pretending they are lets get them help so they can start being adults.
"Costs more per person, short term. Costs less long-term as it actually solves the problem and thus doesn’t require and infinite firehouse of money lasting forever into the future."
DUH, these bureacracies are what we have now, and you are still advocating starvation to people who fall outside your parameters, which are set by Gov, which depends on its politics.
Do you know the stats for people the UK Gov have killed with your methodology?
> DUH, these bureacracies are what we have now, and you are still advocating starvation
Stop lying about what i am afvocating for. I am explicitly advocating for the exact opposite. Welfare means the poor dont starve.
We are done here, I wont discuss with people who lie about what the other person says and acts like a child.
Go away.
"If thats what you need then thats why I include psychiatry int he list of things that one may need to do instead of job training. if a licensed therapist says you need it I dont mind that help being provided, but its too easilya bused otherwise."
Right there, you provide conditions for your welfare, which are unacceptable.
What do you do if an individual says "I need rest"? How can the therapist determine that? WHY SHOULD SOMEONE NEED PERMISSION?
@freemo @scottsantens More to the point, it is implicit that you would stop monies if someone didn't train, or didn't do what you told them to do.
You ARE advocating a system that WOULD KILL.
No that was an assumption on your part because you didnt bother to ask.
the basic need of minimal food and a place to sleep out of the elements as a minimum is non-conditional in this hypothetical system.
> Oh, so you are paying a universal basic income and providing shelter.
There you go lying about what I said again.. and i asked you to go away the last time.
> Well look at you, you are actually a UBI advocate!
A soup kitchen is not a UBI, you are being blocked now for thinking it is.
@freemo @scottsantens Oh, so you are paying a universal basic income and providing shelter.
Well look at you, you are actually a UBI advocate!