SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Think of it: The government prints more money or perhaps — god forbid — it taxes some corporate profits, then it showers the cash down on the people so they can continue to spend. As a result, more and more capital accumulates at the top. And with that capital comes more power to dictate the terms governing human existence.
UBI really just turns us from stakeholders or even citizens to mere consumers.
Meanwhile, UBI also obviates the need for people to consider true alternatives to living lives as passive consumers. Solutions like platform cooperatives, alternative currencies, favor banks, or employee-owned businesses, which actually threaten the status quo under which extractive monopolies have thrived, will seem unnecessary. Why bother signing up for the revolution if our bellies are full? Or just full enough?
Under the guise of compassion, UBI really just turns us from stakeholders or even citizens to mere consumers. Once the ability to create or exchange value is stripped from us, all we can do with every consumptive act is deliver more power to people who can finally, without any exaggeration, be called our corporate overlords.
No, income is nothing but a booby prize. If we're going to get a handout, we should demand not an allowance but assets. That's right: an ownership stake.
https://medium.com/s/powertrip/universal-basic-income-is-silicon-valleys-latest-scam-fd3e130b69a0
(Score: 5, Insightful) by shortscreen on Monday October 15 2018, @10:45AM (2 children)
The Fed prints money, not the government. And they are already doing so. They just give the money to banks, instead of directly to Joe Sixpack. This guarantees that capital accumulates at the top. Over the long term, people who aren't getting free money will tend to accumulate debt, while the banks who are getting the free money will end up owning everything.
If you have UBI and its value remains constant then there is a limit to how much capital can be accumulated unless the total wealth in the entire system increases, which would be a good thing no?
What does this even mean? Being alive involves a certain minimum level of consumption. You don't have a choice there. What do you want be a "stakeholder" in and how is it relevant?
All those things involve risk. UBI would remove some of the risk so more people could explore alternatives.
Revolution is a nice fantasy. In reality it tends to involve a lot of dead people.
What corporate overlords? Instead of working for them or doing business with them, start your own. With UBI there would be less risk.
Buy or create your own assets. Or don't. Your choice.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Monday October 15 2018, @11:32AM (1 child)
kind of a key point you hid up at the top of your post. The Fed manufacturers new debt through banks. Citizens are not allowed to create assets without incurring debt to the federal reserve and it's banks. Reversing this system and handing over the cash to people instead of banks in the form of UBI is an interesting idea.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 15 2018, @02:17PM
It's quite possible to do that. It just takes somewhat longer to do than borrowing money.