It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A work or die mentality doesn't work. Why we deserve a basic income.

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 12:01 AM
Excuse me , but get a job you bum.......... I couldnt even read past a few sentences in the OP. Someone has to work and I will be damned if I am going to keep doing it on my own with the few others who have the balls to man up and get a job , any job. Take it back a work no place to sleep , no food , no clothes , no toys. Do you think those that work are going to continue to to keep you up. Just sit back with your phone or IPAD and relax , we will work and with our pay bring you some grapes to eat snowflake. Maybe we should massage your feet and fan you if you get a bit warm. It has been and always will be work or die unless you are truly disabled , then the tribe will care for you, but if you can do something then get off your ass and get out of mommas house and get to work.

edit on 12-7-2016 by savagediver because: so pissed of course I spelled bad!

edit on 12-7-2016 by savagediver because: Again pissed

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 01:07 AM

originally posted by: Benicealways

And no, welfare does not create poverty, quite the opposite, America has the most poverty of the first world countries and the least welfare, whereas the more social countries have virtually no poverty.

And while it's true that some welfare systems remove the incentive for work, because by working a job the people don't make any extra, this simply would not happen with a basic income.

And again, people love to work and do something productive they enjoy, and also, most people want more material wealth than just the basics.

You are absolutely right. But when I go back in time and remember how I saw the world back when I hadn't been out of the USA long, I think no one could have convinced me of these truths as that time. It was very deeply anchored in me that humans had to have fear for survival as a constant motivator otherwise they would sit back and never be active. That greed had to be nurtured and developed, so that they never stop chasing dollars.

It took me a couple years of living abroad and witnessing firsthand that this was not true to actually accept I'd been hoodwinked.

The welfare system in the US nurtures laziness, in that aid is taken away if a person finds a job. So that puts pressure on them to stay still and kill all dreams and creativity in order to assure their survival. I have been there!
This, of course, is good for the masters because it sustains the myth they want us to believe about ourselves...

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 03:30 AM

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
After looking over the thread, I have a couple of questions for the OP or whoever would like to answer.

Oh, well, here we go then

- Where do the funds come from to support this "basic income". Be specific.

Very specific. During the transition phase, every machine that is installed and that takes away those "precious" jobs we are all supposed to have should be payed a virtual salary for each hour it works. Companies should pay at least the minimum wage to the robot. Say that the lowest salaries are roughly 5 dollars / hr, well, then installing a system that takes away 20 jobs and will run 24 hours a day will earn itself 2400 dollars each day. Given that a machine was built to serve man it will gladly give us its salary. That money goes into a fund, the fund will be used to pay the basic income.

- Where are the robots going to come from to make everyone able to work less? Large corporations? What makes you think that said corporations would do anything to help "their fellow man", and not keep the profits for themselves?

The robots are initially built by (payed for) humans, then by teams of men and robots (the current situation, actually) and then by robots themselves (and we do this on a small scale already). Robots will become general purpose machines that can handle almost any job you give them, including repairing and building other robs.

- Who will provide this "basic income" or basic resources to the people? What if the owner of a resource decides that they don't want to give up control of this resource at any price?

See the first answer I provided: the machines will provide the BI for all. Because "everybody" will have money (job or not) "everybody" will participate in the new economy. And "owners" of robots would be punishable under Law, as they are now, if they did not pay a fair wage to their machines (in fact: the BI fund). You'd need law enforcement and the proper laws, but that's just a matter of slight adjustments to the existing laws. Perhaps robots might assist us here too.

- How will you address inflation, or demand from the masses for more money? Be specific.

Well, dear man, how do we address inflation now then, how? Be specific..

We don't. Yes, in the end we can all 'buy' a bread for a million bucks while earning 20 million each week, no matter what system we use. It will be then that people realize the nonsense of it all and we will do the transition to a moneyless society. We will decide that all that need something are entitled to have it and the robots will make it. No money needed.

To safeguard us against lunatics that would waste resources on their egos, we still would have laws, we still would have politics, we still would have democracy. People will remain in control, but the pressure of having to do boring or even inhuman jobs will be gone. But people will, for example, still study, still learn, still be into politics, still be brewing their imperfect coffees, even though the next robot could make him a perfect one. We still read paper newspapers too, after all, though we could all simply use e-readers.

- If an AI is developed that will provide for free robots and maintenance thereof, how do you ensure that the AI doesn't up and decide one day that humans are no longer necessary? Or the robot workers develop enough sentience that they decide not to be slaves one day?

If you are part of the movement that advocates the survival of the fittest and believes that every species kills the weaker one, you will have your answer: we won't survive. But I don't thinks so, as by observation I learned that nature is a far more complex system than just "survival of the fittest". Nature is mostly symbiosis and cooperation. Even a lion walks with his prey if he's not hungry. Why would robs kill us - we're no harm. And actually, if they develop AI, they would probably treat us gently, like we do with old folks. They are quite useless now, but have served their purpose and are treated accordingly.

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:23 AM
a reply to: Jonjonj

It is pure hubris to think anything or anyone is beyond nature, we are in the end still just animals, very complex animals.

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:33 AM
what an incredibly stupid #ing idea TC is one of the pieces of # who probably just sit there collecting welfare and complain they arent getting enough. GROW UP

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 11:19 AM
a reply to: blindlyzack

An incredibly stupid idea like health insurance and social security......

If people actually had any idea what is actually going on, they would realize we are about half way to a BMI anyway.

What happens when the majority can no longer find employment because their jobs are replaced by machines?, we just let everyone starve and ship it overseas to sell?.

That's pretty much the plan, NAFTA, EEA, WTO, TPP.......

Enjoy your "skinny" existence and slow death.

Or become a pirate and steal what you need to survive, like governments and business do.
edit on 12-7-2016 by MyHappyDogShiner because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 10:33 PM

originally posted by: schuyler
Unfortunately, for YOU to get this "Basic Income" requires ME to work. I'm not particularly interested in providing you all this freedom to be yourself when it is at my expense. No one else owes you anything just because you were born. You don't "deserve" anything. You need to, one way or another, pay your own way and not be a burden to everyone else. I don't really care how you do this or how well you do this. You will be rewarded according to your effort. That some people are born with a silver spoon in their mouth is irrelevant. That happens in every society that has ever been. It doesn't change the basic issue that for you to be free I must be enslaved.

That's because you're brainwashed into capitalism. The fool always believes he's right.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:07 AM
a reply to: Benicealways

In a perfect world where humans were not evil, a voluntary communist society would be ideal.

Since it is not a perfect world, the current best option is pure voluntaryism.

In the future, robots will do everything and jobs will shrink down to very very few. The new war will be for land and resources, even more than it is today. If we keep allowing evil people lord over us, they will use the technology to rule over us even more than they do now. They will live in luxury while the vast majority of people will live on super low government assistance. Instead of bread lines everyone will get a weekly robot delivered bread robot.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:10 AM
Scandinavian countries for example; employees paying upwards of 60 percent of their income in taxes for social welfare systems. There is no way, in the current state of the US with all of the jobs that have been shipped overseas to jobs not paying people enough for that to even happen. Not even to mention a higher population in comparison.

A lot of the spending-side programs in Scandinavian countries cost a lot. Taxes would definitely need to be increased in the United States if it were to adopt them. If the U.S. were to raise taxes in a way that mirrors Scandinavian countries, taxes—especially on the middle-class—would increase through a new VAT and high payroll and income taxes. Business and capital taxes wouldn’t necessarily increase, in fact, the marginal corporate income tax rate would decline significantly.

One source

Switzerland, the first country to vote on basic income, voted recently, but they turned it down:

GENEVA — Swiss voters on Sunday overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to guarantee an income to Switzerland’s residents, whether or not they are employed, an idea that has also been raised in other countries amid an intensifying debate over wealth disparities and dwindling employment opportunities.

Finland is implementing a monthly income trial program to see if it is successful.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:52 AM
I haven't finished reading the thread but I'm loving all the crazy things people are saying! Like the one poster who said she'd punish her children by putting them to work for a month if they wrote the OP. OMG, that's harsh. Not really loving that one actually. Evilevilevil.

And I keep thinking about Maslows pyramid and what it means to be a community, a true family. A nation. I keep thinking about the negative consequences that psychological stress has on our bodies... and I believe that a more stress-free environment would open us all up to amazing things. Seeking stimulation is a natural thing we do when we've got all the basic survival stuff covered.

I agree with you OP. Love.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:26 AM
After I have finished reading the thread...

I swear to god this just happened this past week, which has been a bad week at work.

A woman that kind of looked like Elaine from Seinfeld and even made the same types of facial expressions like she's always smelling something bad, came into my work the other day...

It was like she came with a script and an agenda. She complained about how the machine grinds the espresso for us and said we should downgrade to the machine that the other stores have where we have to physically scoop, measure, and grind every shot of espresso per drink. She literally called it going back to "being human." And I was really put off by that and she could tell and then complained about the drink and demanded a refund. THEN. I sent her to the customer service because I don't do refunds, and the customer service lady called my counter and asked me in front of this character, "don't you do refunds at your register?" And she had a TONE with me. And we never, ever took refunds at our counter. So that B just made me look stupid in front of a customer on purpose.

I bet they're all friends with the Serial Espresso Rapist. Yes, we have one of those and I'm not ignorant to the possibility that Serial Espresso Rapist has friends. She also came and basically raped me this past week. And I had some very deep insightful revelations regarding her.

So BTW, I'm a fan of the machine that more consistently and quickly grinds every cup fresh for us. We fill up the espresso daily, it is NEVER OLD. And I'm a fan of technology. And for me, more manual labor doesn't equal "being human" to me. Like seriously? People be crazy... lol. And I can't be convinced any other way about it. Also, if I could afford my own life being a barista, then I would be a proud barista. But I'd still do other things too... cause, boredom. Maslow's pyramid. I could be all kinds of other things (I am going to school btw, to be other things).

And for real people? If you hate that machines are doing all the work for you? Then please walk. To work. And everywhere else. Including out of my life. Cause you can walk yourselves until you're human somewhere else out of my face.

Ty. Have a good night now.
edit on 13-7-2016 by geezlouise because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 03:17 AM
Karl Marx predicted after capitalism next step is communism, first all workers will earn same income. We already see it in garbage/construction industry, where they earn same as people with high education. in 1900s garbage man / construction worker was earning a lot lot less than educated person.
edit on 13-7-2016 by suvorov because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-7-2016 by suvorov because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-7-2016 by suvorov because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 04:06 AM
I'd rather see people not eating out of Garbage cans trying to survive, than to listen to others, carrying on about how their money is going to the poor and complaining about it endlessly.

Society is failing badly. People are starving in 1st world countries, this is wrong, to me anyways.

People need to wake up, and remember their money is going to the Rich, so why not filter it back to their own, in society who are poor and needy? Why just complain about those who are discluded, yet ignore those who are actually taking your money and becoming richer? They're not your own kind, they're 'rich and greedy' and don't care about the tax payer.

When life is upside down and backwards, that's when society begins to fall apart.

And it's falling apart as we speak.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 05:00 AM
a reply to: BoxFulder

I disagree. I think more free time creates a more vibrant and creative culture, and not to mention great music. In the past, artists could live on cheap rent and create / innovate all sorts of cultural things. Now everyone is overworked, struggling to pay their rent and have no time for nothing. Culture suffers, and the 'haves' also lose out because sh#t sucks all around.

edit on 13-7-2016 by nOraKat because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 05:48 AM

originally posted by: Benicealways
a reply to: cynicalheathen
Name 1 resource that is scarce, crucial and also un-recyclable.

I've followed the thread until now and what sticks out with your post is the following:
You always say resources are not scarce. You even go that way and try to say there is enough forever.

Have you thought about the fact that resources are scattered all over the globe?
For your idea to work, we would need a one-world government.
No borders.
No politics.
No private land owning (!)

Because you can't just walk up on the land that I paid and worked for extracting resources. Paid and worked for so I have my own freedom and peace. Imagine no one but everyone "owns" everything.

Have you ever observed how kids play together in large groups, where the toys are "for everyone"? "Thatś mine, I saw, touched, thought of... it first, so itś mine for now. How long? For as long as I want. You have a problem with this? Leave me alone or see what happens..."

You're idea, as nice as it may sound will never play out, until we unite as humanity. And because of that, will never play out. This is my opinion and may differ from others.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

A.I. could set everyone free, can't have that....

Of course not, look up the definition. Would you want to be enslaved for your eternal life?
What if the A.I comes to the conclusion, in terms of the universe, we humans are not that interesting.
So why not use the resources of the planet to discover new things out there?
I mean, by creating a true A.I., you basically create a new form of being. One that may consider itself more worthy than humans.

Oh wait. Thats what we humans do with animals already. Do you care about tiny animals living in the old house before you tear it down to build something new, better?

Written by someone working in the field of robotics, self learning/optimizing machine code.
I was there when the first artificial seagull learned to fly on it's own, nipping on my coffee.

Not saying the creation of a true AI will sent us into a machine war but people demanding that an artificial intelligence to erase all the problems for them forget one thing:

Would they use their resources to work for someone else that

a) is far less intelligent
b) makes mistakes and even want you to execute commands that makes no sense to you
c) seems like a waste of time for you?

What we are talking about when we say we use an AI to solve our problems is in reality this:
Let's enslave another intelligent being to work for us.

To get this to the end, there is a difference between AI, true AI and a simple computer.
It's not my fault that almost nobody is aware of the fact that a true AI is not just a magical piece of code.
true AI != AI

BTW sentient != intelligent
I hope the processing power of the average reader is enough to take a look at the definitions of words. Not just how they are used in this street slang some may call scientific articles and research.
edit on 13-7-2016 by verschickter because: Edited because line-breaks messed up

Second edit: By the way, if anybody want's to use the argument:
"But we can program it so it wont hurt humans et cetera".
Answer: No, you can't. Because if you do that, you

a) can't call it AI
b) can't succeed. Because someone, somewhere will get hurt.

To circumvent b), you would need to clarify what "hurt" means. Not only learn it, hard-code it.
Don't get me started on that...
edit on 13-7-2016 by verschickter because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 06:59 AM
I'd like to ask a question of those against the basic income plan.
If it proved to be cheaper to provide this basic income, would you still oppose it?
By cheaper, I mean of course that it would mean you would not lose a penny in taxes and may even see a reduction in what you pay depending on your government's will.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 08:45 AM
a reply to: savagediver

The point is that due to human labour obsolescence a new economic system will exist, where working is not necessary for subsistence living and eventually more.
Interestingly free market capitalism is the fastest system to reach this point and we'd probably be there all ready if we had it. Stuff will be made for virtually nothing as such an environment is naturally deflationary eg tech, music,etc. very cheap and without labour cost will get cheaper as any extra unit produced cost is declining towards zero.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:51 PM
a reply to: Zngland

Whats going to stop some people from being lazy and never working. The population will keep rising and there would eventually come a point in which we couldn't provide the "basic income".

Then without the "basic incoming", the people who don't or rarely work would start to riot. They would starve and riot.

I don't see how the basic income idea is possible without very high-end technology and a plan for population control.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:55 PM
a reply to: savagediver

It has always been a work or die mentality. I think the real issue resides in fair work and pay. It's far too often that I see people work their a$s off for almost nothing, while people who chose the right degree make 100x more money for far less work.

I'm all for capatalsim and the opportunity to make more money with entrepreneurship, intelligence and skills. However, I don't believe that having more intelligence and skills should create such a huge pay gap. I don't believe an individual should make 20x more money because that person has the intelligence to program code or the skills and risk-taking personality of an entrepreneur.

However, I'm not sure how we could change that. The entire world would have to comply with a fair pay law. Otherwise, higher skilled individuals would just move to countries that would pay far more than countries with a "fair pay" law.

I think society has the possibility to evolve and create more fair pay. Yes, I know fairness is a lie told to children. However, the world doesn't have to live in an uncompassionate existance forever.

edit on 13-7-2016 by blueman12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-7-2016 by blueman12 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:00 PM
I have an idea. Let's have two money systems. One the way it is now with dollars paid to people that work a job, own a business, etc. Another where you get "credits" for volunteering or doing something that contributes to the overall good of society. There could be a system that supports these "credits" for purchasing things.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in