-48
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by ModerateImprovement@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 37 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Fuck Reason. Bunch of Libertarian bullshit. Don't believe a word they say.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Reason_(magazine)

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

They should have named it "Rationalization".

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 12 points 3 months ago

Propaganda is against the rules. OP has been turboposting articles from VOA and other heavily biased sources. Seems like a violation to me.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

They kept insisting VOA had journalistic integrity even after I pointed out that they're run by the same organization whose brief is to broadcast American propaganda to Cuba.

[-] oxjox@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago

Yeah - fuck those guys reporting on research done by the National Bureau of Economic Research and agreeing with the concluding opinion that "the study shows participants were better off, despite the decline in working hours and earnings. Indeed, maybe that's the whole point?" and "One person wants to learn new skills or start a business? Great! Others want to play video games all day? Awesome.".

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

I'm not seeing them agreeing with it. I'm seeing them call it bad news and a failure.

[-] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

But think of the GDP!

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago

Researchers found that giving people $1,000 every month for three years resulted in decreased productivity and earnings, and more leisure time.

Oooo nooooooooooo more leisure time?!? Less pointless grinding???

Oh the huge manatee!!

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 months ago

We should definitely give all that money to billionaires and their hiers... those folks know the meaning of grindset! /s

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

In capitalism, there is an upward funnel through which money goes from the poorest to the richest. You need a way to take some off the top and inject it back at the bottom of the funnel to keep everything working. Jobs are part of that, but clearly that alone isn't working.

Whether it's through UBI or public services or whatever, there has to be a way to keep that money churning.

I don't know. I'm not an economist, but that seems to be a fundamental flaw in the current system. When the rich have all the money (envisioning a far off day when AI really can do all our jobs) the economy breaks and we are forced to throw all the wealth (and the wealthy) into a big volcano. Which honestly doesn't sound all that bad, but it'll be painful between now and then. I think UBI is a potential fix.

I also think it needs to be thought out really, really hard. Because there are people out there waiting to prey on the unsophisticated with their payday loans and their buying annuities (what else is UBI, really?).

Or do away with capitalism but I'm old and that sounds scary.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

It'll trickle down eventually! I've been waiting for it to happen since the Reagan Administration, but just be patient!

[-] ModerateImprovement@sh.itjust.works -4 points 3 months ago

I think negative income tax is more suitable for application and has less cons than UBI.

[-] restingboredface@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

Multiple issues with this article (and maybe the underlying study).

No mention of the sampling strategy - what were their average hours of work per week ? What was the average income (not including $1000 from the UBI)

Why is productivity measured as # hours worked? I can sit on my ass without doing anything or I can bust my butt to get shit done. It's a lot easier to generate good work (and do more with fewer hours) when I'm not stressed about where my rent is coming from.

What about other outcomes besides work? How about amount of savings and ability to cover unexpected expenses? It's certainly a good thing for people to get some savings for emergencies, job loss etc even if the benefits aren't seen in the economy for a while. But even if people are spending that money it still supports the economy regardless of whether it is done in the name of leisure or to get a new job.

[-] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

"The results are bad if you want low-income people to be doing other things with their time, for example working."

I don't care if they're working or not, personally.

this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
-48 points (12.5% liked)

News

23296 readers
2319 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS