frostbiker @ frostbiker @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

207

Joined

2 yr. ago

As a side note, why are you worried more about the rich than the poor?

I am not. I'm offering the argument that a UBI may well lead to a less productive population, which makes it even harder to maintain a UBI in the first place.

They will get UBI too so worst case they hit the same floor as everyone else.

But if there are no longer rich people to be taxed because they have been sucked dry then there is no source to fund the UBI. Hence the notion that "rich people will fund the UBI" doesn't fly. Not to mention that wealthy people find it relatively easy to move to other countries with less taxes.

Tell us more anecdotes from the early 80s boomer.

She retired last year, making her Gen X. I am younger than her.

Not that any of that makes any difference: people stop working as soon as they have the means to do so.

Since you have resorted to personal insults it is safe to assume that you have ran out of actual arguments. Thank you for the conversation.

They are not 67 years old for one.

Do early retirees act any differently? My kid's teacher retired at 55 and she wasn't talking of all the work she was planning to do afterwards. I know a couple other healthy early retirees and they don't do anything productive either.

The funny thing is people in this thread are complaining that rich people contribute nothing to society, but they avoid saying that the reason rich people don't work is because they don't have to. We all know that if we didn't have to work we would not do a fraction of what we do today.

If we reduce the number of people who actually work and contribute to our tax base, there will be not enough budget to fund UBI, healthcare, or anything else.

A UBI turns everybody into a pensioner.

Wait what? This is not even close to true.

A pensioner receives a stable income for life even when they are not working.

A UBI recipient receives a stable income for life even when they are not working.

It seems to me like a pretty similar situation. And what do most people do when they are eligible to receive a pension? They stop working. They may do a little volunteering on the side, but it's not typically on the ballpark of what they did before.

I'd like to hear your counterpoint.

Retired people can contribute time to their families, the community, and other non-capitalist endeavors.

Of course, and that's great. But who pays for the UBI? Rich people? And what do we do when we have taken everything from them, or they move overseas?

Even if you have a fairly narrow economic view of what it means to contribute to society, there is no question that retirees are making those contributions

How does their volunteering compare to the forty hour weeks they used to work, on average? How specialized is the work they do compared to what they used do do, on average?

When we remove the incentive for people to do something, they do it less.

Any early retiree is most likely a billionaire

My kid's teacher retired at 55. So you think she was a billionaire?

so by definition they weren’t even contributing that much to begin with, probably just hoarding generational riches.

So rich people don't contribute to society because they don't have to work in order to live. However, people under a UBI will be very productive because they don't have to work in order to live?

A pensioner is someone that by definition already contributed the most they could to the economy

Not really. There are plenty of healthy early retirees. Do they on average contribute more or less than before they retired?

As experience has it, plenty of pensioners continue to work even after retirement.

What percentage? How does that compare to what they did before?

Thank you for your very mature contribution.

There is a general problem in mass psychology where people sitting around a table or in their armchairs try to imagine the impact of a policy without conducting a study or looking at historical results.

Let me present some more historical results: retirees. Do pensioners contribute more or less to society than before they retired? Are they a net contributor or a net drag? A UBI turns everybody into a pensioner.

The two situations are not identical, but they give me pause.

Is it better for people to be in constant fear of poverty while being maximally productive or for people to choose to be less productive in a field they enjoy while being supported by taxes extracted from corporations and the ultra-rich?

If you were super rich and your taxes increased dramatically, what would you do? If you were a corporation and your taxes increased dramatically, what would you do? And where would this all lead? The real world doesn't always work the way we would like it to.

Really hope these comments helped you reasses this crappy take

Insulting people rarely changes their minds.

I am aware of various pilot projects and remain unconvinced. Pensioners are the closest thing we have to an UBI, and to my knowledge their contribution to society falls off a cliff once their retire. Sure, some of them may volunteer here and there but overall they contributed much more through their taxes when they were working.

But in general, people want to do cool things, even boring or simple things, as long as they feel they are contributing to something good.

Do people who retire contribute to society more or less than they did before retirement? Pensioners are the closest thing we have to a long-term UBI today.

Thank you for your very articulate and respectful counterpoint. It sure helped me learn something new.

It also allowed them to get certain healthcare services that aren’t covered by OHIP like dental care.

That sounds like a good reason to expand OHIP, which doesn't require a UBI.

As for the rest, I wonder to what extent it went that way because the participants knew it was a short term experiment. Pensioners are not the epitome of productivity.

Let's not conflate income and wealth. With a living wage you may not be able to accumulate wealth, but at least you will have your daily essentials covered.

My concern with a universal income is that it discourages healthy people from working and thus contributing to our collective wellbeing. So while in principle it helps some people who currently fall through the cracks of our welfare system, it also reduces the pool of people contributing to it through their taxes. Is it a net win? I don't know.

The Holy Spirit told me she is full of shit.

Metro shows the price per 100g in the tiniest most illegible font. It's specially hard to read on their new e-ink price tags.

Children steamrollers do not belong in cities.

Edit: Can you think of a better backronym for SUVs? Street Unsafe Vehicle? Super Unsafe Vision? Severely Unsafe Vehicle? Striking Unsuspecting Vulnerables?