So, someone on Newsweek recently posted an article calling UBI a "trojan horse of economic ruin." It's an opinion piece, but his opinion is so crap I feel the need to respond.
In an era where the siren song of Universal Basic Income (UBI) captivates many, we must critically examine the harsh realities beneath its alluring veil. UBI, with its promise of fixed income for all, irrespective of employment status, emerges not just as an economic folly, but a direct affront to the principles of liberty.
HAHAHA. Direct affront to the principles of liberty? You NEED a UBI to allow people to be free under capitalism. This is just right libertarian tripe.
UBI represents a grand experiment in economic alchemy, an attempt to materialize prosperity from the fumes of fiscal irresponsibility. Proponents hail it as a cure-all for poverty, a silver bullet to eradicate financial woes. However, this illusion crumbles under scrutiny, revealing a scheme fundamentally at odds with individual responsibility and freedom. The redistribution of wealth, central to UBI, fosters a culture of entitlement creating a recipe for economic disaster.
That's a whole lot of fear mongering.
Also, culture of entitlement and recipe for economic disaster? Tell me youre a fake libertarian who wants to force everyone to work without telling me.
There is nothing "universal" about the government picking the pockets of the industrious to line the wallets of others. This is not empowerment; it's robbery and subservience dressed in the garb of charity. The government, acting as a paternalistic overlord, decides who gets what, how much, and when. UBI's one-size-fits-all approach overlooks the diverse needs and challenges of individuals.
Sure it is, it liberates people from economic coercion and gives them the ability to say no.
Also, I dont believe property is a natural right, deal with it.
Also, i would argue against the idea that the government is being paternalistic here and deciding who gets what on the basis of it being a one size fits all approach. If anything, that's the point. We don't want a system that is too involved with setting requirements about who gets what and putting conditionality to things. That's how you get paternalism. UBI's universal approach is what makes it a more libertarian safety net.
Economically, UBI is akin to quicksand. The idea that a state can indefinitely sustain its citizens without encouraging productivity is dangerously naïve. Such a system would lead to inflationary pressures, devaluing currency, and resulting in a vicious cycle of increasing handouts and decreasing value, ultimately stalling economic growth and innovation.
Yeah until you do some research and find that most people would still work, and that it really depends on the implementation of the idea, and that gee we literally have $76k GDP per capita the last i looked, and maybe growth isnt the end all be all of everything.
The fiscal implications are stark. Funding UBI would necessitate astronomical levels of taxation and debt, burdening future generations with today's reckless financial decisions. This approach, effectively extorting Peter to pay Paul, where Peter represents the hardworking populace, undermines the foundation of a robust economy.
It could be funded in a balanced budget way.
Also, this is like the 5th time already they've used alarmist language about this destroying the economy. So much doom and gloom without actually proving anything.
Moreover, UBI's indiscriminate disbursement of funds fails to consider the nuanced complexities of individual needs. It risks creating a culture where the virtue of hard work is undervalued, and the gratification of effort is obscured by the haze of unearned comfort. UBI, in its misguided "generosity," would erode the value that work imparts on individual character and societal cohesion. This one-size-fits-all approach is not just inefficient; it's profoundly inequitable. In this light, UBI ironically ends up being a regressive measure, diluting the incentives for personal achievement and societal advancement.
I'm just gonna say it. Screw your work ethic, you fake libertarian. Your entire system is designed to coerce people to work as de facto slaves, and the one thing that liberates them you scream about. You right libertarians don't represent true liberty. You represent the defense of private property and the privileges of the rich from the masses of wage slaves.
Also, again, it's not supposed to delve into the complexities of needs. it gives everyone a check, it lets them do what they want with it. That's freedom, baby.
In countering UBI, we advocate for a society where success mirrors one's efforts and capabilities, not state largesse. We envision a future where individual initiative is rewarded, and personal responsibility celebrated. This dream of a free, prosperous society is attainable, but it demands a rejection of the allure of UBI in favor of a steadfast commitment to liberty, hard work, and self-reliance.
I mean, why not both? To me, you can have both meritocracy and UBI. They're not incompatible. I just dont take belief in meritocracy to literally socially darwinistic levels.
Also, it is supportive of liberty and self reliance. Maybe not hard work as much, but it does still give plenty of room for work to be rewarded.
But yeah. Otherwise, yeah. Screw your obsession with hard work.
We need freedom from work. That's not to say people can't be free TO work, and I certainly would support some level of meritocracy existing, but that's the thing, I only support it insofar as it promotes a functioning society. You guys fetishize the concept and inherently believe people need to be effectively enslaved by your property system in order to motivate people to work. You call yourselves libertarians but you're anything but.
We must also address real solutions for poverty and unemployment, focusing on creating an environment conducive to job creation and entrepreneurship. This means reducing regulatory burdens, lowering taxes, freeing the market, and fostering a culture that prioritizes work and innovation over dependency.
We already have "full employment." Tell me more about how we need to create more jobs. And also, you wanna create an environment conducive to entrepreneurship, uh...give people a UBI.
As a society, we must resist the allure of easy fixes and embrace the hard truths—that prosperity is earned, not given; that freedom thrives not on passivity, but on empowerment. Work is not just a means to earn; it is a conduit for purpose, dignity, and social contribution. The path to a prosperous, free society lies not in UBI, but in the unwavering commitment to the principles of liberty and individualism.
Okay, let's get something clear. For as much as I say "F work", I fully understand that we need some level of work for society to function. But that's just that. I only recognize the value of work up to that point.
What these guys do is FETISHIZE the idea of work. They believe we need to be working all of the time to maximize economic growth endlessly. We just keep working forever so number on chart go up. If number on chart doesnt go up as fast as it could, that's bad to them.
Also, that's what this guy is REALLY on. The protestant work ethic. This guy that work isn't just a way to earn, it isn't just a motivator to get people to work, it's all of this dignity and social purpose crap.
You guys talk a big game about liberty but you guys REALLY love forcing people to work. You have internalized the protestant work ethic to an insane degree and you really are big on forcing people into your little social project. Screw you, you fake libertarian. A real libertarian gives people the FREEDOM to do what to do. To work, or not to work, and if they work, they have the liberty to work on their own terms. You guys just want wage slavery.
If you really care about liberty and individualism, you want a UBI. You want to give people the freedom to live as THEY want to live. Not the freedom to live as YOU want them to live. Shove your forced purpose nonsense. I reject your value system, I see it as the slavery that it is, and I really wish that after telling people that they need to be forced to work, that you would stop saying you're for liberty and individualism. Because you're not. You're just another form of collectivist. Youre more collectivist than I am. Because I'm only collectivist insofar as believing we need to tax people to fund a UBI and other programs. You're collectivist in the sense that you literally wanna force people to work and participate in your own little idea of the social project.
Real empowerment comes from the ability to forge one's destiny, unshackled by the constraints of state-driven fiscal policy. True liberty is realized when individuals are free to innovate, create, and reap the fruits of their labor without the specter of governmental overreach. Embracing these tenets is key to fostering a society where individual merit and hard work are the cornerstones of prosperity and where each person's success is a testament to their determination and ingenuity.
Let's fix this one:
Real empowerment comes from the ability to forge one's destiny, unshackled by the constraints of wage slavery. True liberty is realized when individuals are free to innovate, create, and reap the fruits of their labor without the specter of being forced to work for some guy's protestant work ethic driven social project. Embracing these tenets is key to fostering a society where individual merit and hard work are the cornerstones of prosperity and where each person's success is a testament to their determination and ingenuity.
I mean, again, I'm not opposed to the idea of people working if it's voluntary. I'm not even opposed to the protestant work ethic driven working to their heart's content. What I'm opposed to is coercing people into the labor force via an economic system that pushes most into a condition of precarity and propertylessness in order to force them to work. UBI fixes that core problem with capitalism.
Again, I just dont like fake libertarians who seem okay with forcing people to work while claiming to be for liberty. Wage slavery is a far greater blight on an individual's liberty than taxation. And I would say taxation is justified to liberate people from that original sin of wage slavery. Property shouldnt be treated as a natural right. it's a subjective social convention. It didnt exist before like 1750 in the form we know it today. Let's stop acting like it's this unavoidable objective morality that comes from god.
Hell, stop invoking god in your little social theories. It's a lazy argument and comes down to the biases of the author. Have the balls to actually argue for your ideas because they work and enhance the human condition. Let your ideas stand on their own merits rather than making a de facto argument from authority.
As I see it, if you want to kill two birds with one stone, both improving the economic condition of millions of people while giving people more liberty, go for UBI. Liberty and economic progressivism are compatible. I'd argue that you kinda need the latter for the former to exist. Because otherwise you're just a wage slave in a hostile socially darwinistic economy that forced you to work to justify your existence. Society is not intended to replicate darwinistic principles, but to act counter to them. If we were to live according to darwinistic principles we might as well just live in the state of nature. Ya know, where property doesn't even exist in the first place, as demonstrated by Karl Widerquist and grant mccall in the prehistory of private property.
*drops mic*
No comments:
Post a Comment