And everything you earn isn't rightfully yours. It's supported by an infrastructure of national defense, courts, police, building regulations, and so forth. You get many years of public school for free. Etc. etc. You didn't do this solo.
So the cost of all the benefits you get as a citizen is to contribute your rightful share, that share being decided democratically in which you have a vote.
If every American was forced by some kind of mandatory conscription to spend a percentage of their life living in the poorest neighborhoods in America they’d probably become pro-social safety net pretty quick.
But this is a real concept. The elite of this world legitimately need pitchfork insurance.
The same way any animal in the jungle keeps the food they earned.
Society is a team effort. That’s what the elections are about.
Edit: I guess the oil kingdoms in the ME are kinda that
Fascism tends to reward work rate, contribution, cooperation, etc., and is typically nationalistic - there is no (Western) nation right now without an enormous proportion of ethnic foreigners whereby a UBI would effectively constitute a massive wealth transfer from the domestic population to immigrants (which is, needless to say, contrary to fascist objectives).
This is basically what we are seeing already, democratically, however. I know here in Australia it seems like there are neverending announcements of unfunded public programs to give out money and other resources to whichever group tugs at the voters' heartstrings most effectively. The coffers are dry, national debt is soaring, fraud is rampant, and yet I'm still positive I'll see a feel-good headline next week about the latest government initiative to "pay off" their electorate.
Democracy is underpinned by populism, if the average person feels like UBI would harm the economy then they'll vote against it. Fascism, authoritarianism and planned economies can completely skip the public opinion portion and just start paying people out-of-pocket if they're liquid enough. We may see something similar here in the US as Trump considers a public tariff stipend to refute accusations of a recession: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/11/19/trump-2000-ta...
That isn’t behavior that occurred in the pilot problems they talk about it.
It will take 15 or 20 years before any UBI could be considered permanent enough for a majority of people to change their work habits.
Not to mention that most people enjoy working as it gives them a sense of purpose.
I do believe that people would still work though. Personally I would like to do a useful job with real benefit to society, but the low pay makes it not feasible. I would still want to work part time at least instead of not at all.
Barring AGI and a swarm of drones/nanobots, you still need people to work. Money is just a unit of exchange. If everyone on earth has a billion dollars, but nobody wants to work, nobody is going to be driving around in lambos.
Utopia or dystopia? Probably both, unevenly distributed
Landlords and other oligopolistic goods-sellers with a lot of leverage and cartel-like dynamics can now count on a base income for everyone. I don’t see how low income housing doesn’t instantly becomes more expensive across the board, with profits funneled to established landlords.
At least with SNAP/EBT, your landlord can’t take that money.
UBI is sold as a cheap program to run because it eliminates the application and verification processes involved with existing benefits programs. But those same concepts could be applied to existing programs.
Other pro-worker reforms could also replace the whole UBI idea, where UBI just feels like a band-aid for a society with worsening income inequality and increasing corporate control. It has a “fix the symptom” vibe.
Literally 100% of them will raise the rent and there won’t be anything anyone can do about it.
In theory, having more capital available in the face of a landlord raising rent an obnoxious amount will incentivize people who aren't making much to move somewhere with a lower CoL that they might not have been able to make work otherwise because of uncertainty in the amount of time they'd be out of work or their base level of money available for that time.
In addition, every seller of a good/service could do the same. They can't all increase prices to extract the full $xxxx a month. There are much more complex dynamics at play then just "landlords will raise rent enough to extract the full UBI benefit."
You think people don't pay their rent with SNAP/EBT?
I've got news for you - they do, by selling their benefits to someone with cash at a horrible rate. To pay rent, put gas in their cars, buy alcohol... all the things money is necessary for.
Any kind of a universal safety net would allow human civilization as a whole to chill out a bit, and could also reduce various petty scams and/or the damage they cause to people.
Giving all 258 million adult US citizens $1000 a month totals to $3.096 trillion per year.
Giving them all $2000 a month totals to $6.192 trillion per year - more than all US tax revenue from all sources combined.
Of course, we already have a $1.7 trillion deficit, with $38 trillion and counting in debt without the UBI, and I assume you're not planning on defaulting on our $1 trillion+ in annual interest payments on the debt either, right?
How about Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which by themselves take up over half of the entire federal budget, are we keeping those too?
If you'd like, we could confiscate 100% of the assets of every billionaire that's a US citizen and hope to sell all of the non-liquid asssets at market prices, that'll get us 9 months worth of current federal spending levels - less if we're adding UBI on top and not getting rid of any other programs.
Now if you want to get creative, we could keep funding the military and use it to go after all of the other global billionaires, that'll get us almost through a full 4-year presidential cycle, at the low, low cost of invading just about every other sovereign nation on earth to rob their citizens, too.
We could also have the treasury start minting trillion dollar coins to both pay off the debt and fund the UBI, but I don't think you're going to like your $2000 monthly UBI check as much when market rent on a studio is $200,000 a month.
If you have better ideas on how to pay for this, I'm all ears.
B) repeated studies and measurements have shown that attempting to police it just doesn't do anything.
> Issue special debit cards for UBI
> Issue special machines/payment processors for those cards to registered merchants, landlords, and utility and healthcare providers.
Various countries have various things that operate on similar principles, such as transit cards etc.
Hell, even VIDEO GAMES have done this: Special "premium" currencies that you can use only for certain things, buy with realmoney or earn through various activities, and cannot trade.
The situation makes it quite hard to work if you are on disability and similar which has led the the numbers shooting up
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskBrits/comments/1mxxksa/whats_dri...
If you extrapolate the graph in the link in a few decades no one will work and we'll all live by claiming benefits off each other. UBI might be better.
I'm interested in answers that mostly preserve the status quo, and in answers that propose more radical shifts.
If you're unhappy with that being called the "real value", what should be called the "real value"? That is, how would you define it?
Maybe we could get society to agree that everyone should get some basic set of inalienable rights that includes rights to housing, enough food to eat, etc. Enough so that losing a job didn't threaten your life or health. This is basically what social welfare systems already do. But I think that the quality of life afforded by taking social welfare instead of working must be kept lower than the quality of life afforded by taking any form of work, otherwise there's no incentive to do unpleasant jobs. If social welfare enables a completely comfortable life, I think one of two things would happen: either the price needed to get a toilet cleaned would shoot up to a level that would basically inhibit most ordinary businesses from forming, or it would become the norm for people to clean their own toilets at work. The latter wouldn't be so bad, I think.
I'm not familiar with the details of these experiments but the first thing that strikes me is that this cannot be experimentally tested without guaranteeing participants a lifetime of UBI. They don't drop out of the labor force because they know it's temporary.
You wouldn't quit your job if you're only promised 2 years of UBI, because the cost that resigning has upon your future employability may be greater than the money from the UBI experiment. Or if you did quit, it would be to make a gambit (such as going back into schooling or training) that will leave you better off once the experiment is over.
The only reliable experiment design would be putting a few million per participant into some guaranteed annuities fund.
Of course this hypothesis is as based in reality as yours, so the only thing we can do is try and find out.
Are you also going to have "free health care" with UBI ? That would be cataclysmic as you would need to also give free diabetic and obesity treatments until end of lifespan.
I don't see why you shouldn't debate such stuff. My take is UBI wouldn't be a good idea just now for such reasons but in the future we may be able to answer that that's fine because the robots will do the work as needed.
TheCleric•2mo ago
dboreham•2mo ago
appreciatorBus•2mo ago
globalnode•2mo ago
you say it like thats a bad thing
appreciatorBus•2mo ago
Feeling emotional discomfort with inequities and inequalities is a common human trait, probably nearly universal.
But there’s no reason to suspect that that discomfort is a good guide toward solutions that help more than harm.
That sort of facile engagement with the problem is what gives us disastrous ideologies like communism.
card_zero•2mo ago
I mean, one might conceptually bundle together practicality, pragmatism, and logic, and then say that caring about anything or having any principles or values is emotional and illogical. (This also gives us disastrous ideologies like communism, and may also be used to force favorite ideas because they're "scientific".)
globalnode•2mo ago
itsdrewmiller•2mo ago
AnimalMuppet•2mo ago
The way he did it was to preach their cult's doctrine to them. "OK, according to your church's teaching, here's the requirements for you to be saved. How are you doing? Are you going to make it? How much harder are you going to have to work in order to make it? Will even working harder be enough to get you there?" When the weight of what their belief system actually demanded of them sunk in, some of them didn't want to be in the cult anymore.
Some of them. A few. Not many. But some.
locopati•2mo ago
PopAlongKid•2mo ago
It's not only recent, according to this quote from 300 years ago.
Jonathan Swift — 'It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.'
globalnode•2mo ago
edit: oh and without sounding too conspiratorial hopefully... how are you going to control a populace that isnt desperate, downtrodden and uneducated... /end conspiracy
bigyabai•2mo ago
I don't personally advocate for UBI, but I'll counter your question with another question; how are individuals supposed to have class mobility in an economy where the majority of transactions are speculative? The traditional "work hard and retire eventually" mindset is not going to last forever. Today's workers are paying yesterday's pensioners.
globalnode•2mo ago
xtiansimon•2mo ago
One can be dispassionate and distant from one’s beliefs and still difficult to convince, because we all harbor some forms of _private reasoning_ about how the world works. If I have strong personal beliefs, they may be gathered from experience of decades. Not going to easily change my world view.
Add maybe a few _false beliefs_ for the xtra complication? (Not even considering the paradox of lying).
Finally, the emotional spin appears as _cynical reasoning_, that toxic mix of anger and resentment. The logic-warrior who ventures here is brave indeed.
m463•2mo ago
Stuff like "why should I pay for this", or "why should they get to be lazy while I work" or "I don't feel like I should work as hard"
So they find other arguments, in a doth-protest-too-much-other-logic-arguments way.