Absolutely. There's loads of people trapped in bad situations because they simply can't leave, it would cost money that they can't risk.
There's a long history of business and land owners opposing anything that might strengthen the hand of wage-labourers in negotiations or strikes - even fairly marginal things like workers growing their own food in allotments or gardens - this was a real struggle in the early history of Joseph Arch's agricultural labourers' union.
Whatever its advantages to society as a whole, UBI will be fiercely opposed by most employers for this reason - the last thing they want is workers who feel empowered to walk away from exploitative jobs.
In his new book "The Queen," author Josh Levin tells the story of Linda Taylor, a woman who became infamous as a welfare cheat. She was a woman who went by many names, was accused of many crimes, and whose image as a Cadillac-driving welfare recipient has lived on. Hari Sreenivasan spoke with Levin to learn more.
Concerning the survival stress:
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: The economics of the future are somewhat different. You see, money doesn't exist in the 24th century.
Lily Sloane: No money? You mean you don't get paid?
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity. Actually, we're rather like yourself and Dr. Cochrane.
@HighlandLawyer @scottsantens
The irony is that all of the new small businesses, all of the economic benefit created by them, all of the money that ordinary people keep circulating in the economy, will actually increase the profits of companies that fight against UBI.
Instead of fighting over who gets the biggest slice of the pie, UBI will bake a bigger pie.
@scottsantens A rather cruel, but in a sense effective hypothesis. Individuals free from competition and survival usually degenerate to tik-tokers. Relaxed, willless, intellectually reduced masses dependent on centralized resource distributors will be a great gift for witty, innovative, creative technofascists, megacorps, dictators.
@apemantus @scottsantens You referenced *actual fiction* to support your argument and have the gall to be dismissive when called on it?
I said there are studies, actual research. Not some random conspiracy theory nonsense on YouTube.
Here, I'll get you started:
https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/reports/rsa_basic_income_20151216.pdf
There.
If you want more then I'm sure you can operate a search engine as I've certainly no interest in engaging with you further.
Ah, the intriguing subject of Universal Basic Income / Services, a proposal both thought-provoking and multifaceted! Your post raises a pertinent point indeed. If we allow our minds to expand into possibilities, one could imagine the transformative impact UBI/S might have on societal productivity.
Imagine the myriad wonders that would emerge as individuals, liberated from the stranglehold of survival stress, find their talents and passions soaring to new heights!
In essence, UBI/S is not an incentive for laziness; rather, it is an ignition for a newfound motivation that could redefine our species' capabilities.
A society unburdened by such stress may indeed usher in a golden era of innovation and creative expression, a time where humankind's collective imagination is harnessed towards noble goals. An era where the true potentials of humanity are realized and celebrated, fostering an age of prosperity like never before witnessed.
@scottsantens I will keep posting this link until we hav UBI in Canada.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200624-canadas-forgotten-universal-basic-income-experiment
Thank you for following me. I post about climate solutions that can be preemptively implemented by ordinary citizens and how much they can reduce global warming without waiting for their governments to act. For example:
If we, the people, reduced our consumption of animal-based foods by 75% we would reduce worldwide GHG emissions by 15%. That is 34% more than all the greenhouse gas emissions from the United States (11.2%) in 2022. And we can do that now, without asking anyone!
Please boost it so more people can find out just how important citizen participation can is.
Take beef for example (see attached image): So, think about all those emissions that would be eliminated if we reduced our consumption of beef by 75%! And that doesn’t include the 26% reduction in water consumption, the 19% of land made available for other uses, and that instead of 95% cattle growth there would be a 75% reduction in the world’s cattle.
But even more than that, we would be eliminating greenhouse gases that are far worse than carbon dioxide. The below figure shows that methane (CH4 - 130 times more potent than CO2) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O - 300 times more potent than CO2) are highly concentrated in animal agriculture.
Don’t believe people can stop global warming? Then you should read my e-book https://www.amazon.com/PLANET-TOO-HOT-eco-conscious-mitigating-ebook/dp/B0CW1FNVJQ , find out for yourself how eco-conscious citizens can cool the planet by themselves and see my calculations below.
According to research published in Nature Food, 35% of all global greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to food production, "of which 57% corresponds to the production of animal-based food," including livestock feed… https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00358-x.epdf
UN Emissions Gap Report says “Global GHG emissions increased by 1.2 per cent from 2021 to 2022 to reach a new record of 57.4 gigatons of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e)…” https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/43923/EGR2023_ESEN.pdf?sequence=10 …
So, if 35% of 57.4 gtons = 20.9gtons, & 57% of 20.9 = 11.45 gtons, then animal-based foods are, 11.45gtons ÷ 57.4 gtons = 20% of all GHG emissions.