What if you never had to worry about rent or food?

[JEDI]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/27/tec....html?iid=ob_homepage_tech_pool&iid=obnetwork

The Silicon Valley organization, known for its elite accelerator program, said that it's looking to fund a study on basic income.

The idea is to cover the costs of basic necessities -- like food and rent -- and then see what people do with that financial freedom.

Will people sit around all day watching Netflix and playing video games -- or will they start businesses? Will they be happy?


um.. isn't this already happening in America with freeloaders soaking in govt $?
welfare, food stamps, Section 8 housing, disability payments, etc

 

[Subyman]

Depends. It gives creative people more means to realize their ideas or goals. I'm sure there are some that would be content to exist and that is it. Maslow's pyramid and such.

Perhaps taking the stigma of normal government assistance away and structuring the study differently could produce interesting results. They are also looking to use different amounts of stipend to see how that affects the groups.

It is a bit different than government assistance since this is a "basic income", so they are simply cutting a check to the person it seems without the administrative overhead.

 

[Moonbeam]

Altman said he's "fairly confident" that the U.S. will adopt some version of a basic income in the future as technology continues to eliminate jobs and new wealth is created.

What? People are entitled to something?

 

[Strk]

It would really depend on the person. I would still work. Would it be just any job? Of course not, since I wouldn't have to factor in "must pay me X amount to support myself." You could do whatever you want (well, capable of too).

 

[MustISO]

My plan is to hopefully "retire" early. As long as I can get healthcare and can pay for basic expenses I'll be fine with a lower paying/lower stress job. I'm tracking my yearly expenses each year so I can get an idea of how much I need to pay the bills.

 

[DrPizza]

It would really depend on the person. I would still work. Would it be just any job? Of course not, since I wouldn't have to factor in "must pay me X amount to support myself." You could do whatever you want (well, capable of too).

And much of the person comes from their personality - important parts of which are developed in early childhood as a result of their rearing. If the parents don't put any emphasis at all on being productive, or are not productive at all themselves, it's far less likely that their children will grow up to value being productive. Others have a lot more pride in themselves.

 

[BoberFett]

I would do nothing. I make a lot of money, but that's mostly because if I have to work I'm going to make sure I get paid as much as possible for that time. If I could live without doing a lick of work, I would. I'm sure there are billions more like me.

Do you know what you call people who are taken care of while contributing nothing to society? Children. And there's a reason childhood ends.

 

[MajinCry]

The same thing that already happens; people would work to get the new Shiny Thing 5000.

There's a reason why people like getting raises, promotions, bonuses and better paying jobs; to get more shiny things.

Oh, and tasty things. Just because you get a predetermined amount to spend on food, doesn't mean you're going to be eating Chinese food four times a day. Which would be living the dream.

 

[rudder]

All these people receiving housing and food money better hope that farmers don't suddenly decide to do the same... otherwise they would once again have to worry about food.

 

[glenn1]

What if you never had to worry about rent or food?

People will get tired of funding this experiment fairly quickly once the answer becomes apparent. Lack of money isn't the constraining factor for the lower class; giving them money without effort to cover their basic necessities isn't going to turn them into poets. Without an internal sense of purpose and morality putting ghetto dwellers onto a higher step of Maslow's Hierarchy is just going to mean they have more time to "self-actualize" by taking drugs, killing each other, and being predatory to boost their own self-esteem since they have no accomplishments of their own to gain it otherwise.

 

[Jaskalas]

Might be considered "free" income, but it's probably just attempting to tip the scales so the average person can once again be as wealthy as the baby boomers were when they came of age.

Story goes you could pump gas and support a family.
Today we find ourselves far removed from the wealth of America's past.

 

[Franz316]

I feel bad for people who would sit around and do nothing if their basics were taken care of. Is the only reason you wake up in the morning to make money? What a pathetic existence that must be. I'm very skeptical of anyone who's sole motivation in life is to make money.

There is a prerequisite to something like this working and that is having a society of people that can appreciate what a gift it would be and then take advantage of their newfound freedom to pursue other more fulfilling projects. Ambition and passion are still required and not to be confused with the "make money or be homeless" mantra of today. It would take a higher level of maturity than we see today to make it work. Some people seem to revel in a life of struggle for whatever reason(pride?), but if we can move beyond that using technology and a newfound maturity, then why not?

I don't think people are against working hard. They are against working hard on things they don't give a shit about. Unfortunately, that's 90% of people today. This would go a long way to allowing people to pursue their true passions. Don't use people on welfare as an example of this not working. Their entire life has been shaped by poverty. It isn't an accurate extrapolation of people that are more emotionally and mentally developed. Of course people still need to have a sense of purpose and that comes mostly from upbringing.

 

[JSt0rm]

The reality is the moment computers have the ability to research and design themselves we all will have a lot less to do. The question will be is it a good thing for people to not have to work anymore? The answer probably depends. People could spend time pursuing creative endeavors and ding things they find truly fulfilling with their lives.

On the flip side a bunch of lazy or unimaginative people will sit and play video games and watch tv for their entire lives. Schools will focus on nurturing children's creativity and then we will have the same divide we have now but creative arts will be the main focus and nothing else will matter as its all robots.

 

[BoberFett]

I feel bad for people who would sit around and do nothing if their basics were taken care of. Is the only reason you wake up in the morning to make money? What a pathetic existence that must be. I'm very skeptical of anyone who's sole motivation in life is to make money.

There is a prerequisite to something like this working and that is having a society of people that can appreciate what a gift it would be and then take advantage of their newfound freedom to pursue other more fulfilling projects. Ambition and passion are still required and not to be confused with the "make money or be homeless" mantra of today. It would take a higher level of maturity than we see today to make it work. Some people seem to revel in a life of struggle for whatever reason(pride?), but if we can move beyond that using technology and a newfound maturity, then why not?

I don't think people are against working hard. They are against working hard on things they don't give a shit about. Unfortunately, that's 90% of people today. This would go a long way to allowing people to pursue their true passions. Don't use people on welfare as an example of this not working. Their entire life has been shaped by poverty. It isn't an accurate extrapolation of people that are more emotionally and mentally developed. Of course people still need to have a sense of purpose and that comes mostly from upbringing.

Your entire post is nonsense. You've conflated working because you have to with working only to make money. Well duh, the point of working is to survive. Once survival is no longer dependent on work. How many parents would rather stay at home all day and play with their children instead of working? Is that a pathetic existence? You seem to be the one with mixed up priorities.

 

[BoberFett]

The reality is the moment computers have the ability to research and design themselves we all will have a lot less to do. The question will be is it a good thing for people to not have to work anymore? The answer probably depends. People could spend time pursuing creative endeavors and ding things they find truly fulfilling with their lives.

Technology will eventually replace almost all workers. Nobody has any answer on how to deal with that. Welfare or basic income may only serve to cover up the problem temporarily. Interesting conundrum, that an easy life may be humanity's undoing. I wonder if Wall-E got it right?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/27/tec....html?iid=ob_homepage_tech_pool&iid=obnetwork

The Silicon Valley organization, known for its elite accelerator program, said that it's looking to fund a study on basic income.

The idea is to cover the costs of basic necessities -- like food and rent -- and then see what people do with that financial freedom.

Will people sit around all day watching Netflix and playing video games -- or will they start businesses? Will they be happy?


um.. isn't this already happening in America with freeloaders soaking in govt $?
welfare, food stamps, Section 8 housing, disability payments, etc

And SO WHAT if they sit around watching Netflix or playing video games? It would depend on an "adequacy-incentive" for the subsidy implied, but it would also depend on whether you use one measuring stick of "value" (money, for instance) or simply ask people about "happiness" or the "purpose" in their lives.

I have a regular retirement annuity. I might have gone back to work, but wanted to see if I "needed" to, with skepticism about recapturing intrinsic-satisfaction elements with a new or unknown job.

I manage some rental property -- a source of income. Sometimes it's paying, sometimes it isn't, or there are gaps. The other things I do with my time provide satisfaction to me. I don't care whether I'm making more money, or whether someone else benefits from my efforts. It was a mindset deliberately adopted. I decided to see how gratifying life with fixed income could be, with nobody to tell me what to do.

I could say "Why are you folks wasting time to post on this forum? Get out there and make some money!" I won't, but you can see the point of it, or so I hope.

 

[JSt0rm]

Technology will eventually replace almost all workers. Nobody has any answer on how to deal with that. Welfare or basic income may only serve to cover up the problem temporarily. Interesting conundrum, that an easy life may be humanity's undoing. I wonder if Wall-E got it right?

I think its true to a point. Its a cautionary tail. We can still communicate via art, music, dance, film and theater with each other and that is meaningful. There will be a market for authentic leather goods made by man and all kinds of things. We will be able to venture into our passions without fear that we will starve. Honestly it sounds like utopia to me. Some will be left behind. Hell my cousin just wants to watch tv 24/7. His dream could also be fulfilled he just becomes (is?) one of the billions of zeros on this planet. The thing is under the present system you could work your whole life and still never have contributed 1 thing of substance to this existence. Should we somehow think that has value over spending time with your loved ones and doing things that make you happy?

 

[Spungo]

The idea is to cover the costs of basic necessities -- like food and rent -- and then see what people do with that financial freedom.

Most people in the US already live like that. We don't work hard just to afford food. We work to have things like cars, cell phones, nice clothes, computers. If I only cared about housing and food, I could just work at McDonalds. California and NYC are weird exceptions where minimum wage doesn't cover basic food and housing needs.

National (or state) healthcare would achieve the goals of that project. Medical problems are the primary cause of bankruptcy in the US. If those problems were taken care of, even people with serious medical problems would be happy and complacent. Ever met Canadians? They seem so relaxed all the time, and the only real difference is healthcare.

 

[Shaun_Brannen]

Will people sit around all day watching Netflix and playing video games -- or will they start businesses?

Both. I think people would get bored over overindulging eventually. It's also going to come down to education -- you need to be educated to successfully start a business. Also, socio-economic status prior to the policy taking place -- you're going to still be poor if you have the mind of a poor person.

I speak from firsthand experience on this subject -- was raised upper-middle class, overindulged like crazy. I'm so sick of playing video games, and I'm only just starting to break the addiction. It's finally starting to happen, but only after the 11th hour, where I've been unemployed for 4-ish months. I got a job last month, that project got scrapped, and the next job I got also got pushed out a few weeks too...

It's also really god damn hard to start a business while having to worry about paying the bills. So you have to save up a ton of money beforehand. I'm ridiculously broke right now, not because my business model was bad, but I was not quite as skilled at my trade as I had thought, and also just had "bad luck."

There are so many ideas I have though, and it'd be wonderful to focus on them without having to worry about rent and food. If I were hooked up with my living expenses, I'd make millions. Unfortunately, all of my lucrative ideas are quite time consuming, and I don't have the discipline right now. Getting there, but yeah.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Over the years, I've learned that I have to work. I used to think "why can't I get a job standing around doing nothing like some people I know?" I just can't do it. I'd kill someone first and wind up on the news for going postal. I used to work for Raytheon and knew someone who's job was to watch two other techs in final assembly for cruise missiles. That's the job, to watch other people work... in a month, I'd be stark raving crazy.

 

[JSt0rm]

Over the years, I've learned that I have to work. I used to think "why can't I get a job standing around doing nothing like some people I know?" I just can't do it. I'd kill someone first and wind up on the news for going postal. I used to work for Raytheon and knew someone who's job was to watch two other techs in final assembly for cruise missiles. That's the job, to watch other people work... in a month, I'd be stark raving crazy.

The flip to you working or doing a boring job is getting paid to do your passion. See thats the conundrum. I assume you like craft beers and probably spend as much time as you can brewing them but you still have to work to support yourself. You didnt want to take the chance of a career change to do your passion because there is risk. Thats the point. If you remove the risk a lot of people will sit on thier asses but some of us like to work on things that excite us.

Im lucky as fuck that I got that but for every lucky sob like me there are a thousand who hate their jobs and trappings in life.

 

[Shaun_Brannen]

Over the years, I've learned that I have to work. I used to think "why can't I get a job standing around doing nothing like some people I know?" I just can't do it. I'd kill someone first and wind up on the news for going postal. I used to work for Raytheon and knew someone who's job was to watch two other techs in final assembly for cruise missiles. That's the job, to watch other people work... in a month, I'd be stark raving crazy.

Yeah, I can't do nothing either. I'd go postal too.

 

[JSt0rm]

Yeah, I can't do nothing either. I'd go postal too.

You dont have to. What are your hobbies? What interests you? Maybe those things were schooled out of you and now all you know are cogs.

In the future under this system children wouldnt be taught what is best for capitalists but they would be taught what is best for them.

 

[Shaun_Brannen]

You dont have to. What are your hobbies? What interests you? Maybe those things were schooled out of you and now all you know are cogs.

In the future under this system children wouldnt be taught what is best for capitalists but they would be taught what is best for them.

Oh, I've already started a couple businesses (those are on hold until I get more money) and am writing a couple of books. Have plenty of stuff I can keep myself busy with... if I ever stop arguing on the internet and playing video games.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

The flip to you working or doing a boring job is getting paid to do your passion. See thats the conundrum. I assume you like craft beers and probably spend as much time as you can brewing them but you still have to work to support yourself. You didnt want to take the chance of a career change to do your passion because there is risk. Thats the point. If you remove the risk a lot of people will sit on thier asses but some of us like to work on things that excite us.

Im lucky as fuck that I got that but for every lucky sob like me there are a thousand who hate their jobs and trappings in life.

I do work at what I enjoy. I just meant I'd work whether I had to or not.