Thank you Charles for these videos. They are literally life changing. On another note...can I ask where you bought your swallow print T shirt? Swallows are my favourite birds 😊
We need to create petitions for UBI in every city and go to every university and get it on the ballot in cities first to get the attention! The Solution to the problems would be to tie UBI to GDP at 30% of the GDP and that would be the solution to any problems! Our government can do any budget they want for whatever they want and give money to corporations for trickle down which does not which since they do stock buybacks with that!
Wow I’m realizing how this would be the pinnacle of abundance!! Wow. If we have the technological resources as well as ecological stability to produce healthy food, shelters and basic societal infrastructure, it would open up so many avenues for where we could offer ourselves of service I’m creativity... holy crap. Wow!
I just want to say, we are consuming a little more, but not 1,000 times more. There are ways to keep people busy without necessarily consuming more. We have created a proliferation of managerial, sales, and bureaucracy roles. We are always fighting for the margin, to get the next sale, to secure the next contract. Even if it doesn't really matter to society if company A or company B produces a thing, it matters to the people in each organization, because their livelihood depends on it. By structuring our money flows according to personal income vs business expenses, and taxing income, but not business expense, we strongly reinforce this. Personal income is made scarce, but business expense is allowed to proliferate. This means the businesses are being encouraged to sell more to people who are encouraged to take home less! We end up spending more resources and effort on trying to create and market new goods, instead of letting people access what they need from what is already available. It should be the opposite. Personal expenses should drive business development. Instead, business success is required to facilitate personal spending. Certainly universal basic income addresses this, but it is not entirely a matter of technology, even though specialization, eliminating barriers, and supply chains efficiency, amplifies the agglomeration of business, and the saturation of market. We have a mindset of perpetual scarcity and endless growth. We need an outlook of perpetuating sanctity and boundless connections.
We need to create petitions for UBI in every city and go to every university and get it on the ballot in cities first to get the attention! The Solution to the problems would be to tie UBI to GDP at 30% of the GDP and that would be the solution to any problems! Our government can do any budget they want for whatever they want and give money to corporations for trickle down which does not which since they do stock buybacks with that!
@@jabel6434 But it rests on the basic assumption that all the other economic variables will remain constant. Economies shift and then we're back where we began with the original Sapolsky quote. To me, it feels to be a little bit like wishing Pi was a finite number when, by definition, it just simply is not and cannot be. That said, I am in favor of UBI, I just do not see how it can be accomplished justly and successfully for any long period of time.
@@r.leroux6718: "...assumption that all the other economic variables will remain constant..." This is the one of the main points to be clear about. Many of the other variables will/should change as UBI is a systemic change and its effects will ripple through the social/economic system. The question is, will the repercussions be mainly positive? All the pilot trials show significant system-wide benefits. One of the major changes will show up in aggregate demand being less volatile than it is currently. This will lessen the severity of the so called regular "trade cycles". But these issues need to be seen in a macroeconomic context.
@@jabel6434 I'm afraid I'm out of my depths as I have no more than even an armchair understanding of basic economics. If things are as you say, then I suppose UBI could become viable. I can see aggregate demand improving (even general creativity, if we can throw that in as a measure) but do not know what "trade cycles" are so I cannot make a meaningful contribution here. To my thinking, human nature itself would need to be the thing that serves as our moral compass as a Civilization and for that I think we should turn to ancient Chinese philosophy which states that man has to be understood as innately Good. But then I do not have a background in moral philosophy either so this is where I should stop.
@@r.leroux6718, Thanks fr this healthy awareness of a limited sock of knowledge. It means there is plenty of room for new insights. I, myself, am only an amateur philosopher and economist. That means I start by looking for basic principles under things because everything is simple in principle. Like, philosophy is god thinking and economics is how humans make a living by cooperating with the creative forces of nature. But it is true that "the devil is in the detail", that is, it is the details that make things seem complicated. So to some principles of economics: The purpose of production is consumption. In economic jargon speak, demand and supply are two sides is one element in economic process. And this is what the trade cycle is about: Demand creates a price for something that is in short supply; but the supply tends to rise faster than demand (ability to pay) so you get an economic slowdown when suppliers find that consumers buy less products for a worthwhile price, so they produce less of those things. This cycle recurs every ten or less years. And this where UBI would have a smoothing effect on the amplitude (troughs and peaks) of the cycle.
How would a universal basic income increase the food supply, or the housing supply? How would it equalize people as far as acquiring these things is concerned? There would just be more bucks going after the same limited supply of stuff.
jfhow , In most economic spheres there is no supply problem but the opposite: lack of effective demand. In housing, we have a special case with suitable land being made artificially scarce to maintain prices at a high level
Charles, is this basic income for adults only? Would their be a limit and no more$ for birthing more kids , like welfare? Sorry to say, but I , as a childfree woman in an area full of full quiver families of 7- 10 kids, keep running into the tragedy of the commons, where I try and live a modest life and am constantly asked to accommodate and cater to those of vastly different values who are out breeding me and using more resources at an exponential pace. How does the sharing economy work in this scenario?
It doesn't work.. It's purely fantasy and the real-world will not be compatible the only way a UBI would work is if we were not Humans but Drones or Robots with no Individualism. There's a better answer than UBI. Give people a chance to improve themselves, build skills and utilize tools, there will never be a shortage of "work" in this world, there will always be innovation and invention, repair, maintenance and cleaning, productivity in any area is about creating something, bringing something into existence, if there is no job, create a job. All people need to have purpose and reasons to live and everyone has their own distinction about what they are here to do. We could do a lot better looking at individuals and who / what they are here for. It could be astrology plays a role, various modalities and tools for self discovery and inner growth. We could also be raising kids in schools focused on the individualism rather than a collectivist philosophy because collectivism always degrades the importance of an individual for the benefit of the collective.
@@mindlightwave, You seem to believe in a spiritual reality. So maybe you have a sense of the rightness of unbiased assessment of someone else's belief even If you dislike it.
A few serious questions 1.Where is the money spent on UBI coming from. 2. Can't people just learn to live on less? I can wear walmart shoes why can't everyone? 3. Degrading jobs seems a little subjective. What if nobody wants to fix the sewers? Stock the shelves? Drive the bus?
My big serious question is with every assertion that "humans are part of nature", why they do everything in their power to destroy it and invent belief systems that separate themselves from it?
Thanks for the talk Charles, i have thought at length on this matter and think...UBI turns a capitalist economy into a socialist one? why is the concept of money needed? an indicator of how much time you have spent doing a task? it is not needed! in anyway shape or form. instead of wasting resources and attention on bogus things like M.A.D. our short existence on this spec of dirt would or could be much better. anyway the people with all the sway and deniro won't give up their influence so easily. the thought process would have to change from "what's for me" to "what's for you" the best description I've heard was UBUNTU. i have asked a few people only a few if the concept of money is required and have been told "yes" it's just i am not so sure, there must be a better more sustainable healthier alternative to what IS at present
Vote ANDREW YANG 2020! Please watch his videos, read his policies, and pay attention to him. He's breaks down everything on many media's but Joe Rogans podcast and breakfast club is his biggest exposure.
Those who have the balls to abandon it without griping about the lack of a middleman: "i need this (arbitrary and subjective numbers game) to survive!!1"
Both left and right can make strong moral arguments for the efficacy of a social dividend. I worry more about whether there is an equitable funding rationale that ensures alignment of social, economic, and environmental interests so as to minimize the corruption of institutional bad actors.
We're constantly sold the idea that we are a competitive species and we need it for the economy but history reveals that cooperation is the factor that made human beings dominate above all other species.The world never had a race from the start to see what species came first. Almost every invention came from someone's godlike natural abilities and human curiosity. Elon musk took an interest of programming to make the game he was playing more interesting. That is what was his spark not by disparity and the dangling of an education that may provide a cut above others. Leonardo da Vinci drew as a child, building his fascinating skills of anatomical likeness and imagination to light. A spark that had to do with the imagination and creativity of a child, again motivation never was overcoming his fellow man. Bill gates spent his childhood immersed in books and learning again from natural human curiosity. The reason society has such an ubiquitous notion that humans are inherently competitive has come about by giving conviction to an unknown. It's simply a belief pattern. Much in the same way that religion pits good against evil 'natural human competition' allows for people to give to the deserving while depriving the undeserving. Then people fall in line with the perceived notion of who deserves to go without and who is evil and now we have issues like black lives matter because someone gets screwed in this belief system.
haha you can now go one step further and correct your OWN view of competition instead of correcting the view of society as a whole. competition is NOT evil ;D and people do NOT try to kill each other just because of it. its actually a wonderful motivator. and it brings about more complex relationships than you would ever had, if you just stroked each others egos all day long. like the saying goes: there needs to be spice in the soup. relax man. adjust your own view first
I'm all for UBI, but let's not lie about the economics. "They've done these experiments where they actually do give everybody an UBI..." Actually most of the studies done so far are flawed: either not giving enough money so that quitting the daily job was an option, either only done on some portion of the population, and on top of that none have been done long term. If you tell people that their UBI would be for 2 years, they'll behave differently than if you tell them it's going to be forever. Case in point: "giving out cash in Uganda helped after 4 years. After 9 years, not so much." Google that quote for source.
Looks like they gave the cash as one lump sum in that case. That is very dissimilar to a UBI. Eventually, with that sort of program, it would make sense that incomes would return to social levels eventually, while net assets would have increased. The lump sum transfer was markedly good for these people, but it should not be confused with a frequent and permanent UBI.
@@bootstrapsdocumentaryserie1693 That's fair and thank you for pointing it out. This is my main point, the studies done so far are flawed. And what I'd like to see, most of all, is the impact of permanent UBI on people that already have low paying, stressful jobs: how many would keep them?
@@altvali1 Yeah, that'd be nice to know for sure. All of the trials so far do not show a decline in work, but they are by definition impermanent because they are trials. The only way we're ever going to learn the answer to your question is to implement a real UBI somewhere, nationally and permanently. And even then, I don't be surprised if a few "UBI nations" screw it up and make it conditional or targeted or something (i.e. not actually UBI). People have a hard time wrapping their heads around true universality.
Would the UBI be supported through taxes? How is this different from socialism? I'm genuinely interested in understanding this better. I'm a huge fan of your work. And one of the reasons I love it so much is because it doesn't subscribe to any of the existing ideologies. And all the ideas you suggest come from a place of compassion. But I'm unable to quite understand this one. FWIW, I have a slight libertarian bent in my thinking. But I'm willing to change my views when provided with evidence.
I am all for UBI and most everything that you talk about in general. But, I think you need to consider that getting a UBI of 1,000 to 1,200 a month will not come close to accomplishing what you are describing here.
For anybody you do something until your sick of it. Humans are dynamic and some might just sit and be less productive but really economies don’t award certain behaviors and that is the issue. The idea of making food for your neighbors but being worried you might not have enough for your “budget”.
People would rather spend their whole life thinking they can change a toilet in to a castle by cleaning it rather than just stepping out of the toilet.
There will never BE a time "when machines do all the work". Those who can't grasp the truth of that are simply living in a dream world. If you do not produce anything, somebody else will be obligated to produce for you, and they may not be happy about that.
Universal basic Isolation may be the result of not being required to go out work, and see people. If we can order everything from home including groceries, and money can freely be deposited into our account without having to go out, and work then what incentive is there to go out, and interact with humans. Today, people are spending too much time online as opposed to going out to meet people face to face. Now if they are no longer required to go out, and work then why would they be even more motivated to go out from the confines of their bedroom, and get off line, and disconnect from the internet, and connect to life. I think universal basic income may work for some, but knowing how people can be I am not sure if it would work. Maybe universal basic income is a good idea if it comes on the condition that people get out, and meet people instead of sitting around, browsing online, and wasting time away.
Why would it matter if some people want to sit inside online? Hell, were there not hermits before the internet. Imagine not caring how people spent their time and money, because it doesn't affect you.
I think we need to give a Living UBI so current welfare is no longer needed. The current Welfare System is all about classism, power and control and it's horrible! Take all the money we use for the welfare system and SS while eliminating the 4 major deductions in the tax code to fund UBI. You can then add a Value Added Tax and Financial Transaction Tax to the tax code and have litteraly around 3,000 a month for all adults. Yeah it's completely possible! Yes what I mentioned would raise trillions a year without any negative effects on the economy in fact is would boom the economy.
Doing things do not mean do things to meet needs. You do things to consume. Like a great basketball player. Setup a great birthday party. Have great sex.
@@jabel6434 what is work? This means different things to different people, one thing I find to be work to me is people who serve no purpose. People who have nothing to offer. People who have skill. People who just take. People who don't do anything become nothing. Empty shells. Find something that you love to do and you won't have to work. I can tell you with absolute certainty not everyone is creative. Most people are not. There are people who love to work on cars. People who love to cook, garden, clean, build, I could go on and on. Maybe you want to sit around and do nothing but not everyone does and nobody but your mama will want to watch you sit around and do nothing.
@@StephanieSunnyPerez: "...People who don't do anything..." This is a stereotype, not real people. Everybody does things by living as part of society. UBI is an enabler for everyone to decide what they work at in order to be part of society. This is quite different "work" from doing things just in order to earn a living.
If we have an UBI we will depend on the people who give it to us. If the government gives it to us we will have to depend on them. What if it works well for 20 years and then we have a government which says: "Oh you say something bad about us? We'll cut your UBI." Bad idea! Capitalism is far from perfect but at least it gives us the freedom of different possible sources of income.
The biggest problem with universal income is that it tries to give an easy answer to a really hard problem. I can almost guarantee that as long as the roots of capitalism (meaning you have a boss/rich people and workers/poor people) are not being dealt with you are not changing anything. Because what will happen if you give all people the same amount of money? Prices will simply soar for all goods and services and real estate so that if you don't have a job on top of your ubi you simply will not be able to make it to the end of the month. Socialism is the ONLY answer.
His perception of money is totally wrong. Money is simply a tool. It is used to store credits for future use. If a job pays little it's bc society as a whole values it less. I'm all for changing the way society values some jobs but using a tool for the wrong purpose does not make sense.
There is a population where you can test your theory. Namely, the "lover boys" of single women on welfare. Are they writing poetry? Doing community work? I wonder.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Andrew Yang! 2020
Thank you Charles for these videos. They are literally life changing.
On another note...can I ask where you bought your swallow print T shirt?
Swallows are my favourite birds 😊
We need to create petitions for UBI in every city and go to every university and get it on the ballot in cities first to get the attention! The Solution to the problems would be to tie UBI to GDP at 30% of the GDP and that would be the solution to any problems! Our government can do any budget they want for whatever they want and give money to corporations for trickle down which does not which since they do stock buybacks with that!
A great conversation!
Wow I’m realizing how this would be the pinnacle of abundance!! Wow. If we have the technological resources as well as ecological stability to produce healthy food, shelters and basic societal infrastructure, it would open up so many avenues for where we could offer ourselves of service I’m creativity... holy crap. Wow!
I just want to say, we are consuming a little more, but not 1,000 times more. There are ways to keep people busy without necessarily consuming more. We have created a proliferation of managerial, sales, and bureaucracy roles. We are always fighting for the margin, to get the next sale, to secure the next contract. Even if it doesn't really matter to society if company A or company B produces a thing, it matters to the people in each organization, because their livelihood depends on it.
By structuring our money flows according to personal income vs business expenses, and taxing income, but not business expense, we strongly reinforce this. Personal income is made scarce, but business expense is allowed to proliferate. This means the businesses are being encouraged to sell more to people who are encouraged to take home less! We end up spending more resources and effort on trying to create and market new goods, instead of letting people access what they need from what is already available. It should be the opposite. Personal expenses should drive business development. Instead, business success is required to facilitate personal spending.
Certainly universal basic income addresses this, but it is not entirely a matter of technology, even though specialization, eliminating barriers, and supply chains efficiency, amplifies the agglomeration of business, and the saturation of market.
We have a mindset of perpetual scarcity and endless growth. We need an outlook of perpetuating sanctity and boundless connections.
Derek McDaniel
, Well said, 9 more tmbs-up
A social dividend COULD liberate people to a life of ecological regeneration. It could be a key catalyst to global healing.
We need to create petitions for UBI in every city and go to every university and get it on the ballot in cities first to get the attention! The Solution to the problems would be to tie UBI to GDP at 30% of the GDP and that would be the solution to any problems! Our government can do any budget they want for whatever they want and give money to corporations for trickle down which does not which since they do stock buybacks with that!
Gosh, so powerful. Think it would be even more so if he were looking directly into the camera.
-_- why type these things
#YANG2020
"What was an unexpected pleasure yesterday
is what we feel entitled to today,
and what won't be enough tomorrow."
~ Robert Sapolsky
Derek McDaniel
, How does that relate? BI gives you a slim support so that you do not have to sell yourself to secure the most basic survival needs.
@@jabel6434 But it rests on the basic assumption that all the other economic variables will remain constant. Economies shift and then we're back where we began with the original Sapolsky quote. To me, it feels to be a little bit like wishing Pi was a finite number when, by definition, it just simply is not and cannot be. That said, I am in favor of UBI, I just do not see how it can be accomplished justly and successfully for any long period of time.
@@r.leroux6718: "...assumption that all the other economic variables will remain constant..."
This is the one of the main points to be clear about.
Many of the other variables will/should change as UBI is a systemic change and its effects will ripple through the social/economic system.
The question is, will the repercussions be mainly positive?
All the pilot trials show significant system-wide benefits.
One of the major changes will show up in aggregate demand being less volatile than it is currently. This will lessen the severity of the so called regular "trade cycles".
But these issues need to be seen in a macroeconomic context.
@@jabel6434 I'm afraid I'm out of my depths as I have no more than even an armchair understanding of basic economics. If things are as you say, then I suppose UBI could become viable. I can see aggregate demand improving (even general creativity, if we can throw that in as a measure) but do not know what "trade cycles" are so I cannot make a meaningful contribution here. To my thinking, human nature itself would need to be the thing that serves as our moral compass as a Civilization and for that I think we should turn to ancient Chinese philosophy which states that man has to be understood as innately Good. But then I do not have a background in moral philosophy either so this is where I should stop.
@@r.leroux6718, Thanks fr this healthy awareness of a limited sock of knowledge. It means there is plenty of room for new insights. I, myself, am only an amateur philosopher and economist. That means I start by looking for basic principles under things because everything is simple in principle. Like, philosophy is god thinking and economics is how humans make a living by cooperating with the creative forces of nature.
But it is true that "the devil is in the detail", that is, it is the details that make things seem complicated.
So to some principles of economics:
The purpose of production is consumption. In economic jargon speak, demand and supply are two sides is one element in economic process.
And this is what the trade cycle is about:
Demand creates a price for something that is in short supply; but the supply tends to rise faster than demand (ability to pay) so you get an economic slowdown when suppliers find that consumers buy less products for a worthwhile price, so they produce less of those things. This cycle recurs every ten or less years.
And this where UBI would have a smoothing effect on the amplitude (troughs and peaks) of the cycle.
I had thoughts like him some time ago. But I smoked some good stuff, man.
How would a universal basic income increase the food supply, or the housing supply?
How would it equalize people as far as acquiring these things is concerned?
There would just be more bucks going after the same limited supply of stuff.
jfhow
, In most economic spheres there is no supply problem but the opposite: lack of effective demand.
In housing, we have a special case with suitable land being made artificially scarce to maintain prices at a high level
Charles, is this basic income for adults only? Would their be a limit and no more$ for birthing more kids , like welfare? Sorry to say, but I , as a childfree woman in an area full of full quiver families of 7- 10 kids, keep running into the tragedy of the commons, where I try and live a modest life and am constantly asked to accommodate and cater to those of vastly different values who are out breeding me and using more resources at an exponential pace. How does the sharing economy work in this scenario?
It doesn't work.. It's purely fantasy and the real-world will not be compatible the only way a UBI would work is if we were not Humans but Drones or Robots with no Individualism. There's a better answer than UBI. Give people a chance to improve themselves, build skills and utilize tools, there will never be a shortage of "work" in this world, there will always be innovation and invention, repair, maintenance and cleaning, productivity in any area is about creating something, bringing something into existence, if there is no job, create a job. All people need to have purpose and reasons to live and everyone has their own distinction about what they are here to do. We could do a lot better looking at individuals and who / what they are here for. It could be astrology plays a role, various modalities and tools for self discovery and inner growth. We could also be raising kids in schools focused on the individualism rather than a collectivist philosophy because collectivism always degrades the importance of an individual for the benefit of the collective.
@@mindlightwave, You seem to believe in a spiritual reality.
So maybe you have a sense of the rightness of unbiased assessment of someone else's belief even If you dislike it.
A few serious questions
1.Where is the money spent on UBI coming from.
2. Can't people just learn to live on less? I can wear walmart shoes why can't everyone?
3. Degrading jobs seems a little subjective. What if nobody wants to fix the sewers? Stock the shelves? Drive the bus?
My big serious question is with every assertion that "humans are part of nature", why they do everything in their power to destroy it and invent belief systems that separate themselves from it?
Thanks for the talk Charles, i have thought at length on this matter and think...UBI turns a capitalist economy into a socialist one?
why is the concept of money needed? an indicator of how much time you have spent doing a task?
it is not needed! in anyway shape or form. instead of wasting resources and attention on bogus things like M.A.D. our short existence on this spec of dirt would or could be much better. anyway the people with all the sway and deniro won't give up their influence so easily. the thought process would have to change from "what's for me" to "what's for you" the best description I've heard was UBUNTU. i have asked a few people only a few if the concept of money is required and have been told "yes" it's just i am not so sure, there must be a better more sustainable healthier alternative to what IS at present
Great questions!
Have you listened to James Corbett's history of the minimum wage? Rather a dark history, also connected to this idea of Universal Income
Edie Domenga
, Basic income is not connected to minimum *wage".
You get this *income* whether you have a job or not.
Vote ANDREW YANG 2020! Please watch his videos, read his policies, and pay attention to him. He's breaks down everything on many media's but Joe Rogans podcast and breakfast club is his biggest exposure.
Great ideas, BUT who will be able to change the whole structure of the economy.
At the moment, who knows? We are in the "space between two stories".
Andrew Yang
@@jonathantoniolo2782 Yang Gang 2020, Andrew Yang can!
Those who have the balls to abandon it without griping about the lack of a middleman: "i need this (arbitrary and subjective numbers game) to survive!!1"
Both left and right can make strong moral arguments for the efficacy of a social dividend. I worry more about whether there is an equitable funding rationale that ensures alignment of social, economic, and environmental interests so as to minimize the corruption of institutional bad actors.
We're constantly sold the idea that we are a competitive species and we need it for the economy but history reveals that cooperation is the factor that made human beings dominate above all other species.The world never had a race from the start to see what species came first. Almost every invention came from someone's godlike natural abilities and human curiosity. Elon musk took an interest of programming to make the game he was playing more interesting. That is what was his spark not by disparity and the dangling of an education that may provide a cut above others. Leonardo da Vinci drew as a child, building his fascinating skills of anatomical likeness and imagination to light. A spark that had to do with the imagination and creativity of a child, again motivation never was overcoming his fellow man. Bill gates spent his childhood immersed in books and learning again from natural human curiosity. The reason society has such an ubiquitous notion that humans are inherently competitive has come about by giving conviction to an unknown. It's simply a belief pattern. Much in the same way that religion pits good against evil 'natural human competition' allows for people to give to the deserving while depriving the undeserving. Then people fall in line with the perceived notion of who deserves to go without and who is evil and now we have issues like black lives matter because someone gets screwed in this belief system.
Very well said! Thank you 🙏
haha you can now go one step further and correct your OWN view of competition instead of correcting the view of society as a whole. competition is NOT evil ;D and people do NOT try to kill each other just because of it. its actually a wonderful motivator. and it brings about more complex relationships than you would ever had, if you just stroked each others egos all day long.
like the saying goes: there needs to be spice in the soup.
relax man. adjust your own view first
I'm all for UBI, but let's not lie about the economics. "They've done these experiments where they actually do give everybody an UBI..." Actually most of the studies done so far are flawed: either not giving enough money so that quitting the daily job was an option, either only done on some portion of the population, and on top of that none have been done long term. If you tell people that their UBI would be for 2 years, they'll behave differently than if you tell them it's going to be forever. Case in point: "giving out cash in Uganda helped after 4 years. After 9 years, not so much." Google that quote for source.
Looks like they gave the cash as one lump sum in that case. That is very dissimilar to a UBI. Eventually, with that sort of program, it would make sense that incomes would return to social levels eventually, while net assets would have increased. The lump sum transfer was markedly good for these people, but it should not be confused with a frequent and permanent UBI.
@@bootstrapsdocumentaryserie1693 That's fair and thank you for pointing it out. This is my main point, the studies done so far are flawed. And what I'd like to see, most of all, is the impact of permanent UBI on people that already have low paying, stressful jobs: how many would keep them?
@@altvali1 Yeah, that'd be nice to know for sure. All of the trials so far do not show a decline in work, but they are by definition impermanent because they are trials. The only way we're ever going to learn the answer to your question is to implement a real UBI somewhere, nationally and permanently. And even then, I don't be surprised if a few "UBI nations" screw it up and make it conditional or targeted or something (i.e. not actually UBI). People have a hard time wrapping their heads around true universality.
This is interesting as the robots & ai will do alot of these jobs with UBI people could creative in the Arts writing lots stuff would be possibly
Would the UBI be supported through taxes? How is this different from socialism? I'm genuinely interested in understanding this better.
I'm a huge fan of your work. And one of the reasons I love it so much is because it doesn't subscribe to any of the existing ideologies. And all the ideas you suggest come from a place of compassion. But I'm unable to quite understand this one. FWIW, I have a slight libertarian bent in my thinking. But I'm willing to change my views when provided with evidence.
The thing that is worrying about a UBI (I used to think a good idea) is whoever provides the money is in power over those that take it.
I am all for UBI and most everything that you talk about in general. But, I think you need to consider that getting a UBI of 1,000 to 1,200 a month will not come close to accomplishing what you are describing here.
Liza Roocroft
, But it is a first essential step. Not sufficient but it is necessary.
For anybody you do something until your sick of it. Humans are dynamic and some might just sit and be less productive but really economies don’t award certain behaviors and that is the issue. The idea of making food for your neighbors but being worried you might not have enough for your “budget”.
Go on Joey, tell me I had no right to be at that symposium... go on...
People would rather spend their whole life thinking they can change a toilet in to a castle by cleaning it rather than just stepping out of the toilet.
Who provides the UBI is in control of the people who receive it.
There will never BE a time "when machines do all the work". Those who can't grasp the truth of that are simply living in a dream world. If you do not produce anything, somebody else will be obligated to produce for you, and they may not be happy about that.
Clare Stucki
, One would not produce things for the money only.
How to stick up for capitalism by advocating for the coin-operated human mentality:
Universal basic Isolation may be the result of not being required to go out work, and see people. If we can order everything from home including groceries, and money can freely be deposited into our account without having to go out, and work then what incentive is there to go out, and interact with humans. Today, people are spending too much time online as opposed to going out to meet people face to face. Now if they are no longer required to go out, and work then why would they be even more motivated to go out from the confines of their bedroom, and get off line, and disconnect from the internet, and connect to life. I think universal basic income may work for some, but knowing how people can be I am not sure if it would work. Maybe universal basic income is a good idea if it comes on the condition that people get out, and meet people instead of sitting around, browsing online, and wasting time away.
Maybe you can earn more "points" by going out and doing social things, that's actually a good idea.
Why would it matter if some people want to sit inside online? Hell, were there not hermits before the internet. Imagine not caring how people spent their time and money, because it doesn't affect you.
Why would anyone want to see people
❤
I think we need to give a Living UBI so current welfare is no longer needed. The current Welfare System is all about classism, power and control and it's horrible! Take all the money we use for the welfare system and SS while eliminating the 4 major deductions in the tax code to fund UBI. You can then add a Value Added Tax and Financial Transaction Tax to the tax code and have litteraly around 3,000 a month for all adults. Yeah it's completely possible! Yes what I mentioned would raise trillions a year without any negative effects on the economy in fact is would boom the economy.
You just reading Andrew yang idea
I disagree, people need purpose and there is purpose in doing things.
Doing things do not mean do things to meet needs. You do things to consume. Like a great basketball player. Setup a great birthday party. Have great sex.
Read David Graeber's Bullshit Jobs
Stephanie Over 50
, Is the purpose of life to work for a living.? And do you like that purpose and life?
@@jabel6434 what is work? This means different things to different people, one thing I find to be work to me is people who serve no purpose. People who have nothing to offer. People who have skill. People who just take. People who don't do anything become nothing. Empty shells. Find something that you love to do and you won't have to work. I can tell you with absolute certainty not everyone is creative. Most people are not. There are people who love to work on cars. People who love to cook, garden, clean, build, I could go on and on. Maybe you want to sit around and do nothing but not everyone does and nobody but your mama will want to watch you sit around and do nothing.
@@StephanieSunnyPerez: "...People who don't do anything..."
This is a stereotype, not real people. Everybody does things by living as part of society.
UBI is an enabler for everyone to decide what they work at in order to be part of society. This is quite different "work" from doing things just in order to earn a living.
If we have an UBI we will depend on the people who give it to us. If the government gives it to us we will have to depend on them. What if it works well for 20 years and then we have a government which says: "Oh you say something bad about us? We'll cut your UBI." Bad idea! Capitalism is far from perfect but at least it gives us the freedom of different possible sources of income.
We can vote Andrew Yang in for UBI in 2020!
The biggest problem with universal income is that it tries to give an easy answer to a really hard problem. I can almost guarantee that as long as the roots of capitalism (meaning you have a boss/rich people and workers/poor people) are not being dealt with you are not changing anything. Because what will happen if you give all people the same amount of money? Prices will simply soar for all goods and services and real estate so that if you don't have a job on top of your ubi you simply will not be able to make it to the end of the month. Socialism is the ONLY answer.
Wim Van Lierde
, We can not know how the the system will respond in the long term. But all the pilots run o far overwhelmingly positive results.
His perception of money is totally wrong. Money is simply a tool. It is used to store credits for future use. If a job pays little it's bc society as a whole values it less. I'm all for changing the way society values some jobs but using a tool for the wrong purpose does not make sense.
There is a population where you can test your theory. Namely, the "lover boys" of single women on welfare. Are they writing poetry? Doing community work? I wonder.
Darmony91
, what a spiteful little comment!