Money for nothing: The good and the bad of a guaranteed government paycheck – Musk and Zuckerberg say UBI could...

Money for nothing: The good and the bad of a guaranteed government paycheck – Musk and Zuckerberg say UBI could help transition workers who lose their jobs to robots. UBI opponents warn the controversial idea violates the work ethic and could even make poverty worse.

View Reddit by mveaView Source


  • How would it make poverty worse if the work is being done and everyone is getting a paycheck? Not trying to oversimplify, but I’m confused.

  • How does having a proper income make poverty worse?

    Yes, we have dishonest people placed onto large platforms. Now that is a fact.

  • A work ethic only would ever make sense in a society that cared and valued work. Our culture cares and only values *jobs*. This is not work, but a compartmentalized, “canonical” or “real” version of work.

    As our view here of work is limiting, those parroting ethics and dignity are, quite frankly, absolutely full of shit until their views are corrected. Their views and remarks should absolutely be discarded and discredited until they fix their position. “Jobs are dignity” really only sounds true, for it’s not dignified to taunt people with survival value in jobs. The alternative to this “dignity” is a social death first, than a physical death later. How is this dignified in the slightest?

    If there are issues one can make with UBI, this nonsense isn’t it. I’ll drop a few.

    – Does it change the dependency upon ‘the market’ which as we’ve seen is designed with morality and sustainability as supplemental or even entirely optional ideals?
    – Are we going to tackle education, healthcare, and many programs of benefits linked to employment or just give people a baseline income and do nothing else?
    – How do we help those who have lost the plot so deeply that their sense of identity becomes from what they do for money instead of what they are as a sentient being?

    Any one of these has more depth than “work and dignity” gutter trash.

    EDIT: In the video on their page, the guy opposing UBI asserts that enacting the program would be “giving up” on trying to train people for future jobs. Is this man an idiot? You can assure a floor for people so that their loss of jobs is not a loss of life **AND** begin the groundwork of empowering people for these new arenas. To assume UBI is defeatist was literally a Hillary Clinton talking point, and this guy is as full of shit on matter as she was when she said something so profoundly fucking stupid.

    How is a floor that doesn’t require conditionality a defeatist position? Is it because it eliminates current games of coercion, which is an act of violence? You likely can’t get people looking for jobs or careers — like the military which gets darkly advertised at colleges, which some have used to handle the shitstorm of student debt — when they have a floor and thus, the freedom to say no and do what they value, not what you want to hoodwink them into. You’re incentivizing not only the wrong things, but things that are inherently worth nothing. One gets away with it because of a lack of social emancipation, a lack of access, unless one eats shit too and calls it sweetness.

  • What is the point of having a work ethic when there is not work? UBI could actually increase the work ethic. It would give people the money to pursue their own ideas.

    It could do for the whole economy what open source software did for the software industry. People could attempt to compete against monopolies who have been able to “cut the oxygen off” from startups.

  • …. when you take into consideration that the low paying jobs don’t offer a full work week; UBI even at 80% below the poverty line is more money then what is on the table for entry level.

    I’m more of a proponent if matching the lico score(canada) as opposed to matching the poverty line.

  • In violation of the work ethic?

    Bitch, please. All experiments so far have shown people keep working, reinvest and become entrepreneurs.

    I’m guessing there’s conservatards behind this ‘argument’. No other group would claim to have a monopoly on the work ethic.

  • “Violation of the work ethic”

    That’s literally not even a problem with UBI. Every study of UBI has shown that this doesn’t happen.

    The problem with UBI is that it’ll foster feudalistic-esque dependency, and most proponents either don’t care to hear this or believe it won’t happen because, for the first time in thousands of years, the elite will suddenly become benevolent and caring towards the underclass and totally never even think of perverting this for their own aims.

    I did a quick little 5-minute thought experiment: I was rich, others were poor, and there was a middleman using some of my taxed wealth to help the poor out. Except I could now use this leverage to gain even more complete control over the poor, because they can’t live without me. And if the middleman (read: State) tries clamping down, I just withdraw my funds and leave everyone empty handed. So they *have* to obey my whims or else. That’s all the time it took for this to happen. 5 minutes.

    Wouldn’t it be nice to just not have a middleman and spread ownership around instead? And I do mean *around*, not centralizing ownership under the government and have them spread it around (read: Bolshevik socialism).

  • UBI. ‘Cause in ‘MURICA you can’t call it socialism.

  • You won’t be able to afford shit with UBI. Others will still make much more than UBI, inflation, prices of goods remain high to adjust for UBI, barely make rent. Probably just enough to get high. The rich will have incredible buying power. You’ll still be shuffled into a shit quality life. And the wealthy elites will remain in power and wealth. Nothing will change.

  • The big problem with this is that work offers so much more than just a paycheck. Work offers social connections, a feeling of achievement and a reason to get out of bed in the morning. I’m not saying that this is true for everyone (it should be though!) but replacing *only* the income part is just the first step.

    As much as I would like to believe that entrepreneurship, culture and science will fill the void, take a look at the rust belt in America to see the dystopian scenario of what might happen if jobs disappear without anything to replace it. Mark Zuckerberg suggests that it can help workers transition but what if there’s nothing to transition to?

  • Then don’t try to make robots at all to prevent jobs from being lost. We all need money, and we all get money from work. Without work means no money, without money means no homes, food, etc. Please, everyone, ban all robots!

  • I knew it! Universal Basic Income (UBI) should have never existed! People, please prohibit/ban Universal Basic Income so poverty would not be as common as without Universal Basic Income.

Leave Your Comment