The point of UBI is that it has no stipulations. It’s guaranteed no matter what.
If a universal basic income started today with the stipulation that you had to put 40 hrs/wk towards making the world a better place or solving societal problems, how would you spend your time?
Submitted 1 year ago by njordomir@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
don@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Bocky@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Exactly. Its value becomes evident when a version gets to the stage where they can’t work. Very different from those that choose not to work.
AA5B@lemmy.world 1 year ago
And even more evident when you need to decide how to set up a bureaucracy, paperwork, and verification to judge whether someone else could be working more, or just not
whoreticulture@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
It’s a hypothetical question, read the room 🙄. He’s just asking what you would do if you were tasked with making the world a better place.
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You heard what I meant and I appreciate that. It was poorly phrased and I wish I had explained the theoretical better.
I qualified it with the “naturally industrious” thing because I wanted people to talk about what they’d do after they slept off the drudgery of current capitalism not immediately upon finding out they don’t have to go to work anymore just to survive and have basic amenities. As you stated, I could have also phrased in an equally bad way where everyone just pointed at their job and said “I have no time or energy”. That’s the problem. I was trying to filter out the “If I had UBI, I would smoke weed and eat potato chips all day” answers.
If I had phrased my question as, “if you had a guaranteed income and were able to use 40hrs a week of your time to make the world a better place, what would you do?” That would have been better.
card797@champserver.net 1 year ago
Can that actually work in the real world though? If we all take the money and do nothing. Would that actually be sustainable?
T156@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Unclear. But eventually, people would work. People get bored, it’s nice to have something to do, and get paid extra on top of it.
UBI just ensures that if they don’t like a job, they can just quit, rather than be forced to keep working on pain of starvation.
Tests so far seem to be fairly positive about it working. People who get UBI aren’t likely to sit on that money, they’ll just go and spend it either paying back debts, or buying something nice for themselves, so the money will keep going around. They might even buy more than they might otherwise have, if they’re not just scraping by.
SuiXi3D@fedia.io 1 year ago
It’s just a job at that point, though.
fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
At least you’re doing something productive instead of just making Chris Kempczinski richer.
anime_ted@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You are indeed, but it points to a fallacy in the original question. It’s not universal basic income if it is stipulated that you have to do something to receive it.
Contramuffin@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Isn’t that just a government job with extra steps? I thought the point of UBI is that it’s meant to be, you know, universal.
As a side note, people have this tendency to think that government programs must be means-tested. That is, there must be a criteria that is met before someone is eligible for the program. Same with your assumption in the post - you assume that it must be better to add a stipulation. There seems to be this natural skepticism that if there is no criteria, people will take advantage of the program. I want to challenge that skepticism.
Adding criteria for eligibility inherently means the government must establish a bureaucracy for checking that the criteria is met. This has two notable downsides that people tend to not consider. First, it causes an applicant to wait longer before they can hear back from the program. With existing programs, it sometimes takes months before someone hears back. This ends up discouraging anyone from applying, even if they meet all the criteria. After all, what’s the point of receiving aid in 3 months if you need the aid now?
Second, it causes the cost of the program to increase. A bureaucracy is difficult to maintain. The more money that is spent on checking for eligibility, the less money that people in need will get. And what is the work that such a bureaucracy will do anyways? How does it benefit society to hire someone to say that people’s needs aren’t “real enough” to get government aid?
Which leads me to a third, additional point - it’s morally questionable to require people to meet a certain criteria before they can receive aid. To put it in another way, why do you feel like you need to gatekeep other people’s needs? If a person says they’re struggling, why should anyone say that they’re not struggling enough?
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I believe that people are naturally industrious and my goal in asking was to hear how peoples priorities would change without the threat of starvation and the like being weaponized by corporations to extract value from the working class. I know many of us would probably sleep for 2 months straight before starting anything. :-D
Perhaps the better question would have been:
If you had your basic needs guaranteed, how would you spend your time?
edgemaster72@lemmy.world 1 year ago
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 year ago
Universal basic income means no requirement to do anything.
However as a worker in healthcare, I’d probably continue as I am.
moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
disabled people (or others who cannot work) would be more fucked than they already are, raising the income floor for everyone except them, - this is why universal basic income is supposed to be universal
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I left it open ended specifically so they could target their time how they wish. I know several disabled people who all contribute to my communities in various impactful ways, some without ever leaving the home. Having said that, my question could have been phrased better.
kava@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The problem is you can’t really define what is “good for society”. Maybe I think weird abstract art is good for society, whereas most people think it’s a waste of time.
Who gets to decide?
That’s an extreme example, but there are many such types of cases. Is a cash advance place “good for society”? It scams poor people but also provides them a line of credit that banks will not.
What about used car dealerships that sell overpriced cars at high interest? Is that “good”? Poor people get scammed but it gets them a car they otherwise would not be able to get a higher end dealership.
As for what I would do? Probably just contribute to open source projects or something.
T156@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Making the world a better place doesn’t need to be some grandiose revolutionary affair.
All the little things you do while being alive would add up. Whether it’s hanging out with a friend, giving your pet some extra pats, or cleaning up your own space, and that would put you a good deal of the way there, if not be enough on its own.
whotookkarl@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You’re describing something more like civil service than ubi I think. But if I was financially independent without a full time job I would focus on hobbies like music and find some advocacy cause to help support, probably separation of church and state or ai for everyone with easier to build and use models on consumer hardware, there’s a few open source projects out there I’d like to understand better and contribute to if I had more time.
cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 1 year ago
My union has me working 37 hours a week. Its not basic income if you have to work for it especially if you have to work more than a full time employment!
Maalus@lemmy.world 1 year ago
8hrs a day 5 days a week is normal employment. Some companies don’t count lunches, so you stay there for 8.5 hrs.
cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Gingerlegs@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’d sit at the end of my driveway and offer free hugs. That’s making the world better, imo
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Hell yeah! I wish you could do that instead of going to work.
Landsharkgun@midwest.social 1 year ago
Are we counting raising kids? Because I feel like that would be the answer for the supermajority of people. It’s super necessary work that society is utterly dependent on, yet we insist on not compensating.
Shit, we could just do UBI for parents and we’d be 80% there.
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Assuming you actually are raising the kids. Plenty of utterly useless parents out there who end up raising other psychos.
meekah@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Because they are forced to spend 50% of their awake time working to make other people rich. I’m sure this would get much better when people get the time to properly concentrate on raising a child and maybe even have time to visit a course on how to be a better parent
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Germany does Kindergeld which translates to “kid money”. Of course Germans don’t want to have kids as much. Many Americans don’t know what birth control is or how to use it (someone else on this thread is solving that issue). I absolutely believe that you should be able to take as much time as you need to ensure your kids grow up well. Plus, some kids are harder than others.
Bipta@kbin.social 1 year ago
This is not universal basic income and the idea is absurd.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Sewing buttholes on teddy bears.
nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 year ago
Disregarding the fallacy in your opening, and calling things for what they are:
If a conditional basic income started today with the stipulation that I had to put 40 hrs/week towards making the world a better place or solving societal problems,
I would spend them by becoming a politician and implementing true Universal Basic Income.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would create “smart home” things for disabled people.
I had enough time then, to go, ask them and find out what is really helpful - without the need to make a profit.
spittingimage@lemmy.world 1 year ago
My current job is receiving/dispatching IT equipment to keep hospitals running, so I think I’d keep doing what I’m doing. It’s a modest contribution, but someone has to make sure the people working on cures for cancer can get their email.
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
One of the unsung heros… no sarcasm. I chose not to imagine my dentist drilling around or my surgeon slicing me up without all their fancy tools and software. Why, because it’s horrifying. Thank you for your contributions.
xmunk@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
I’m a developer, I have some open source projects I don’t have the time to invest in… I’d probably shift like 40% of my time to that open source projects.
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’m with you on the 40% thing. If I didn’t need to put in 40hrs to get my health insurance, I would absolutely work on several smaller tasks instead of 1 big job, just to avoid the burnout that comes with doing the same thing for those long stretches of time. It also gives us context and allows us to make connections that we may not otherwise make.
_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
I guess I’d keep doing my current job and enjoy the extra income by spending it on luxurious things like grounded electrical outlets and updated plumbing that isn’t falling apart.
NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Its funny that basis things like working plumbing, or access go clean water could be considered luxurious.
I would keep my current job as well but take a day off each week (instead of one of my weekend days) to cleanup my surrounding neighbourhood. I would probably use the extra income to repair some wood benches, buy paint to cleanup graffiti on walls, and throw down grass seeds along local trails.
vynlwombat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Look at Money Bags over here
Tensilespark@lemmy.today 1 year ago
Honestly, I would go back to being a park ranger. I loved the job and helping people in nature, I just couldn’t survive on the pay. If that wasn’t an issue, I would go back in an instant
Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Telling people that think there can only ever be two political parties that they are 100% wrong.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You might be better off trying to change the US voting system. The first part the post sturen there is now will always result in two dominant parties m.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&pp=ygUoZmlyc3Qg…
fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Spreading awareness and availability of birth control and family planning. We’ve been above global carrying capacity for a long time now, and it will end badly. I’d try to soften the blow.
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Good point, if people are inclined to be child-free, we should celebrate that and support them, not nag them every Christmas and ask when they’re gonna have kids, also it’s what allows others to have kids without contributing as much to overpopulation. It also means kids end up with parents who actually wanted kids. I’m totally on board with this.
fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Thanks, I appreciate that.
cley_faye@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would not do anything, claiming that I’m preventing myself from making the world a worst place.
Haha joking. I’ll start auditing open source project for free and improve the overall security of our whole infrastructure.
nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 1 year ago
How the hell would one define "making the world a better place?’ 😂
Muffi@programming.dev 1 year ago
I think that’s the entire point of this exercise. Thinking about what making the world better would actually mean and entail.
JakJak98@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’d imagine about 600 pages of beaurocratic law which has several addendums that nullify the definition entirely.
aturtlesdream@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would do my current job for free with people who need it but couldn’t afford it (massage) think seniors, sick, disabled ect. Also, spend time working with animal rescue/shelters in some way
shit_of_ass@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Deleting my socials (i spread misinformation)
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think I’d keep my current job. 40/wk is the grind I worked to get away from.
Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Sick. What MLM are you a part of?
bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
Honestly I make well above what the UBI would pay, so I’d keep doing what I do. But I have dreams of investing in garbage-burning power plants in the US, and having some of you able to help with this makes it much more obtainable.
fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Wouldn’t that be absolutely terrible for air quality? It already feels like I’m sucking on a car exhaust in half the cities I visit.
bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
With proper filtration, it’s a good choice. It can keep us from burning more fossil fuels, and also keeps the land fills from producing methane (which is worse than co2).
Tiempo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
I would work as Chef in a communal restaurant where we cook the rich. Freshly served and hunted by ourselves.
Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Edgy
Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would argue with racists on the Internet
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Someone has to educate those people, right?
grue@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Let me stop you right there. If there are any “stipulations,” it ceases to be “universal” by definition.
Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yep. That’s literally what a minimum wage job is
neidu2@feddit.nl 1 year ago
Except some minimum wage jobs involve making the world worse.
otp@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Lmao…a minimum wage job is not 40 hours a week of making the world a better place, and where I live, it cannot provide for the basic necessities of life.