Far too loaded question to be honest
Some people are hard-wired to take, others to give.
There will always be people that benefit from the vulnerability of others. Sadly, it's in our nature unless we evolve to a better state of being.
I quite like the idea of giving every human alive a basic, comfortably living wage to sustain themselves on. The choice to go out to work and earn more is theirs. That would solve a lot of problems IMO - no more getting any old job because you need one, no more trying to stab someone in the back to afford basic food and water, etc etc.
It's proven that when you alleviate poverty - crime and corruption go down.
If I had my way everyone would have all they wanted, people would only work because they enjoyed it, and there would be absolutely no hatred to your fellow human because of race/religion/nationality/sex/sexual orientation/possessions etc etc
Ahhh, but, I'm just an idealist! Not a Marxist before you start! There's no ultimate equality in my dream, nor in any reality.
Main problems with this:
1) People who do work and pay taxes to provide the "basic income" for everyone else resent that they have to support so many leeches. They can move to other jurisdictions, lobby for changes, etc.
2) If the basic income is comfortable enough, more and more people will choose that option and not do much productive work. As fewer and fewer people do productive work, eventually their productivity will not be high enough to support everyone else, and the whole system will collapse.
3) A basic income does not prevent crime or eliminate poverty, as some people will spend all of their income on drugs/alcohol/gambling and then still not have enough for shelter/food. A better option than a basic income might be a rent voucher and a food card, although even these are open to abuses of various kinds.
All that being said, as technology progresses and the need for humans to work grows ever less, it is likely that productivity will be so high that providing everyone with the basic necessities of life will be a negligible expense. But these people will still be considered to be in "poverty" because the definition of poverty is always relative to the times. The "poor" in America today live like kings compared to the poor of a few centuries ago.
Yeah, you have good and valid points there. That's why I said it was complex.
First of all we need to sort of evolve. Before that transition we will just continue hating each other and feeling negative about things we don't have, or have to give without our consent.
So, in answer to you:
1) We will always pay taxes regardless of who benefits from them. And actually, it's not as if we "know" where it's all going. I doubt the unemployment bill is as much as they say it is - I bet about 0.001 of the taxes from my salary goes to unemployment. Which isn't much. Wars, government salaries and local government salaries are a whole lot more. As I said, evolving to care for your fellow being is paramount (not saying you don't, just a general statement)
2) That is correct. Although the people that do choose to work will be 10,000% more productive. I have worked in a lot of shitty jobs before and have done because I've "had" to. In almost all of them I've dicked around as much as I could to pass the time. I'm now in a job I absolutely love, and have been realistically wanting all my life - guess what? No clock watching, always eager to get the job done, excitement when getting to work in the morning. This would be straight up, good work ethic for everyone.
3) Yes, there will always be addicts - however there will be less chance of getting into addiction because of having everything you want. Usually addictions start because of low income families, unhappy parents friends > which lead to a huge generation hand me down abuse cycle. It could snuff out shit like that. People are less likely to be unhappy when they have a lot of things. Ok, it will never cease it completely, but the alleviation would be great. Also, it would stop the need for crime to pay for stuff people cant afford - because they have everything. Who will need to do that?
Hi Ibian,
Again, another valid point.
We would, corporations would, institutions, anything that made an obscene profit and can afford to pay CEO's something ridiculous like $16,000 per second. That's far too much profit in my eyes. That's why Capitalism sucks - there's real high winners, yet huge losers at the other end.
It sucks that the way we are managed right now is that people at the top of the class pyramid own everything, yet they forget or know but keep it from us that we prop them up. As soon as productivity and obedience stop - that's when things go tits up for them. As soon as we revolt, they're f**ked. You think there would be a monetary gain for anyone on a day where people everywhere walked out of work and didn't buy anything or use a service? That would suck for some people!!
Anyways, nice debate! Keep it going
