It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: FyreByrd
So if I produce something, I get punished for it by having some of my reward for having produced it stolen from me? Why would I produce especially as I am guaranteed a minimum level of support in the first place?
originally posted by: Peter Brake
A minimum guaranteed income would allow people to pursue those activities that inspire and excite them if they didn't mind a very minimal lifestyle which should be their choice. People would not have to live their lives and make decisions based on fear. People that want 'stuff' could still pursue what ever their hearts desire and those whos desires are less material could as well which would benefit society as a whole in numberous ways.
Take fear of poverty out of the equation and you deflate all manner of crime, hatred and agression along with other societal manifestations of fear and the attendent costs.
There's an old SciFi book from the seventies called "The Peter Pan Bag" or somesuch that introduced me to the idea and I believe that the Star Trek federated planets worked on such a basis.
Would unemployment get worse?
I think it would be less. I think there would be much more innovation (rather then 'disruption' which is all the rage now) and useful improvements in many areas of endeavor.
I agree with the innovation, I think we would develop faster in many ways, people no-longer worried about the next meal can make career decisions on what truly interests them. Gifted people doing what excites them must lead to creativity.
I do have an answer for this thread, however my concern remains unemployment. The universal entitlement means there is no unemployment benefit, nor is there a government agency continuously on your case to get paid employment. This would be replaced with an agency that assisted your effects if you wanted a job.
Sorry to be expressing my doubts here but I am a one man band and I do need feedback, as their are many possible outcomes from initiating change. Universal entitlement means none go hungry, so possibly my concerns are irrelevant in any case. However a family group could pool their resources, buy all the gadgets they want with one worker between them, with the rent paid and food on the table. Spend their lives vegetating in front of the variety of boxes the one self sacrificing worker has provided.
I'm asking why you think unemployment would not be affected. (hope your right)
edit on 12-2-2015 by Peter Brake because: (no reason given)edit on 12-2-2015 by Peter Brake because: Lost link to FyreByrd quote