I don't agree with basic income, because I believe like welfare people will find ways to exploit it.
The whole point of UBI is to avoid means testing, so there's no reason to game it. Of course, if anything, we won't have actual UBI because it's most likely politically untenable because of the exact perspective you have, but some form of extended welfare, which requires some kind of means testing, which is then gameable.
The people who have a drive to work will seem like they are getting less.
If it's truly UBI, then these people can avoid the feeling like they are getting less by not working, or taking a job closer, or starting their own company, that doesn't require driving to work. "I don't want to drive to your office" becomes an acceptable and usable reason to quit your job because you don't actually need a job under UBI.
Plenty of homeless people will waste it on cigarettes. I'm actually for it. These are precisely those people for which the currently rampant paternalism is NOT helping. It just further communicates that they are no longer worthy of bettering themselves. This attitude is pervasive and exists as a direct reflection of our neo-liberal capitalistic state. It floats around like pollution in the aether between egos and stifles anyone sensitive to it. Once that's happened the means-testing merely communicates that they are being measured and slotted. That anything known of their condition will only be used to humiliate them further; There is no help. I don't have statistics at hand but these people (hobos) largely aren't reproducing. Can they not just smoke and be comfortable? Why are we so desperate to police the abuses of these systems? Making proper use of them is already it's own reward. Let's just allow people to punish themselves for as long as they feel they need to. Without giving them any more evidence that they ought to...
Comments
I don't agree with basic income, because I believe like welfare people will find ways to exploit it.
The whole point of UBI is to avoid means testing, so there's no reason to game it. Of course, if anything, we won't have actual UBI because it's most likely politically untenable because of the exact perspective you have, but some form of extended welfare, which requires some kind of means testing, which is then gameable.
The people who have a drive to work will seem like they are getting less.
If it's truly UBI, then these people can avoid the feeling like they are getting less by not working, or taking a job closer, or starting their own company, that doesn't require driving to work. "I don't want to drive to your office" becomes an acceptable and usable reason to quit your job because you don't actually need a job under UBI.
Erg... English is most annoy. I'm pretty sure OP meant "drive" as in motivation, not the car type :)
But yeah, your point it still kind of valid.
Point being, if you are motivated to work then you inevitably get more. If you simply rely on UBI then you get enough for cheap rent and cheap food.
Pretty sure a UBI doesn't allow for a new xbox games and a carton of cigarettes every week.
Plenty of homeless people will waste it on cigarettes. I'm actually for it. These are precisely those people for which the currently rampant paternalism is NOT helping. It just further communicates that they are no longer worthy of bettering themselves. This attitude is pervasive and exists as a direct reflection of our neo-liberal capitalistic state. It floats around like pollution in the aether between egos and stifles anyone sensitive to it. Once that's happened the means-testing merely communicates that they are being measured and slotted. That anything known of their condition will only be used to humiliate them further; There is no help. I don't have statistics at hand but these people (hobos) largely aren't reproducing. Can they not just smoke and be comfortable? Why are we so desperate to police the abuses of these systems? Making proper use of them is already it's own reward. Let's just allow people to punish themselves for as long as they feel they need to. Without giving them any more evidence that they ought to...