This comment is made frequently enough that I wrote an article for my UBI FAQ about it years ago. A UBI is not UBI if it can be withdrawn like this, and we don't see this with existing programs like Social Security. Seniors don't feel afraid to speak out.
"We can't have universal health care. It won't work because the government will just refuse to provide it to people who protest the government."
Yeah sure. Countries all over the world have that problem, right? Universal health care is a bad idea because citizens fear losing it?
It's so frustrating. Conservatives should be crying out for UBI right now *because* of its unconditionality. Some Republicans almost even connected the dots recently when they carved out exceptions for unemployment so that they could refuse to get vaccinated and still get UI pay.
I disagree with everyone refusing to get vaccinated, but it's also true that no one should lose survival income for refusing to get vaccinated, or for protesting. That's an argument for UBI, not against it. Survival income is a human right. Fear of poverty should not be a weapon.
This was essentially Hayek's argument for UBI. You should never be in a position where others (state or corps) have power over you to get you to do things thanks to lack of UBI. Some amount of income should be unconditional in order to reduce domination.
If you're worried about the "Great Reset" and governments tying income to certain behaviors, then get off your ass and start fighting for basic income as a human right. Stop saying stupid shit like people don't deserve survival income "unless" they do shit for it.
IT IS A RIGHT.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What if everyone spent every waking hour making really cool things? How cool would that be? Well consider also that there would be no hours spent enjoying anything created because everyone would be creating not enjoying.
Are the things actually cool if no one gets to enjoy them?
6-day weeks used to be normal. Then 5-day weeks became normal. It's past time for 4-day weeks to become normal. There's just so much stuff being created, and increasingly by machines. Humans need more time to actually enjoy all the stuff and life itself. We need to shift gears.
But what about all the jobs going unfilled? Paying people more per hour for fewer total hours per week would make many jobs more attractive, and the people filling those jobs would be less exhausted and more productive. Plus they'd have more time as consumers to create more jobs.
Interesting threat. Basically, Mitch is like "Look here, everyone. If you make it easier to debate and vote on legislation, we're going to start debating and voting on legislation, and none of us here want that, right?"
Mitch is framing it like a bad thing, for Congress to actually debate and vote on bills, because some votes could make legislators look bad to their constituents, but the lack of that is exactly the problem. If a lawmaker votes yes on unpopular laws, then voters SHOULD fire them.
Right now, elections have less teeth, which is helping drive polarization. People just vote for their favorite team, and because of gridlock, people win based on what they say. If they start actually doing unpopular things, that could change who people actually vote for.
I chatted with @JENFL23 the other day about UBI, MMT, ranked-choice voting, the @Fwd_Party, and about incentives in general and how what @AndrewYang is trying to do is to get people excited about reforming systems with reforms that don't typically excite.
Getting people excited about the possibility of starting to receive $1,000 a month is a lot easier than getting people excited about the prospect of being able to vote for more than one candidate, and ranking them to convey preferences. But the former may just require the latter.
To those not steeped in politics, especially those turned off by it, it's really challenging to get people excited about reforming a process they aren't interested in, but we need to try, and that's what Yang is attempting to do. He's trying to mobilize the disengaged.
We must break out of our current understanding of taxing to spend that limits our ability to spend, when the only real limits we have are our real capacity limits. The issue isn't lack of money. It's what to do in addition to spending to manage inflation.
We are watching what happens in real-time of this belief that we can't somehow afford $3.5 trillion in spending, despite being our own currency issuer. Means-tested stuff gets more means-tested. Stuff gets axed. Other stuff expires faster. It's the wrong discussion to be having.
We shouldn't be arguing over what to save and what to cut and what to trim. The debate should be on how to best design the programs, and then how to best manage the impacts of that spending on the economy. What kind and amount of taxes? How to best improve supply chain issues?
67% of over 1,000 Americans surveyed in new poll support #UBI. Support was strongest among Democrats (82%), Gen Z (79%), Finance and Insurance (71%), non-college grads (71%), and those earning under $25,000 (77%).
The top benefit of UBI according to those surveyed was that it would decrease both poverty and inequality, and help those with poor health and disabilities.
The top concerns were that it would reduce the incentive to work and increase the national debt by costing too much.
When asked how people would use their UBI, most people said they'd save it for retirement, or save it for emergencies, or buy groceries, or pay off debt.
GenZ with the strongest support for UBI is the most likely to pay off student loan debt with it.
We just ran a huge unemployment experiment. Half the states reduced UI, it didn't increase employment compared to the states that kept UI. Then the UI expired and it didn't increase employment. Obviously UI isn't the issue but they REALLY want to force people to accept low wages.
These people want so badly to exploit others for their own benefit, that they don't seem to see that they're making things worse for themselves too. You can't cut incomes in a consumer economy and expect employment to rocket up. Consumer spending is what fuels our economy.
If we want to increase employment, we need to realize a pandemic still exists, and that's the main issue to tackle. We also need to make sure everyone has money to spend, and that they can afford things like child care to make employment make sense.