Take 1 trillion dollars from the billionaires in total, now distribute 1K to each person each month? Sounds great but you run out of money in only 3 months. Then what?
Sounds great but you run out of money in only 3 months. Then what?
We won’t because billonairs don’t hold the knowledge to run factories, they just monopolize infrastructure and collect a toll. We won’t run out of money because the production is still there.
Then maybe our source of money should be that production, and not the personal wealth of billionaires?
Like, if you make a car that runs on diesel, and there’s a gallon of diesel in the world, you’ve made a car with 1 gallon of fuel.
If you make UBI that runs on the contents of billionaires’ bank accounts, and there’s three months’ worth of money in those bank accounts, you’ve made UBI that works for three months.
Enjoy the fruits of liberated market. /s Honestly though you assume that the only value of liquidating assets from billionaires is getting their dollar amounts moved from on bank to another. There is a reasonable assumption that freeing up that capital to be enthusiastically invested or utilized to meet demands would provide more economic growth than it sitting in large hoards being spent in most risk adverse ways or in near total whimsy.
There is also a reasonable assumption that taking away people’s money would result in a decreased expected value from future money, leading to a decrease in the motivation to produce that we currently enjoy.
Let’s say a person goes from having nothing to having $1M in the bank. How does a person do that? Well, in a free market they do that by providing $1M worth of value to other people.
Should that person, who we know is capable of providing serious value, go on to try to have two million? It would be good for our society if they did, so we’d better hope they do.
But if our history includes a day when all the billionaires had everything taken from them, this means that they now have to ask themselves if there’s any danger of going over the threshold, become “evil” in the eye of society, and stripped of their rights.
Suddenly being rich is quite dangerous. It alters the incentives. Assuming a very straightforward connection between potential reward and motivation, it could be very bad for the economy to liquidate the richest people’s accounts.
It’s a fairly ahistorical assumption that wealth accumulattion is done mostly through wealth creation. Anticompetitive practices, rent seeking, and maximize value extraction are all common practices for incumbent market leaders.
You basically create precedent to give away excessive wealth in order to influence it’s effects on the world instead of reinvesting it purely in mechasms of control of wealth.
No. It really, really isn’t. Stop allowing those same billionaire dragons dictate the narrative. The reason wealth redistribution seems so fraught with issues is that billionaires pay to spread that falsehood.
According to www.notebookcheck.net , a framework 13 with a Ryzen 7840U will run out of battery 22% faster than the macbook but will outperform the macbook by 85% on some benchmarks. I wouldn’t pick the mac.
I am fine with my current salary. None of the problems I have are due to having too little money. It is more that I have hardly any time to spend that money and live a fairly lonely life. None of that would be fixed by a higher salary, which is why I have little motivation to try to get promoted.
I would suggest volunteering at animal shelters on your days off might help with the fairly lonely life. The one by me let’s you check out dogs to go to the beach with and return.
I was often in charge of lighting the grill when I lived at home with my parents, we used a hot air gun to light the grill, and it worked really well, we never used lighter fluid, just hot air, and during the process you easily see flames comming up from the burning coal.
Failing that, I used to be an active member of a herritage railroad with steam trains, looking into the firebox of a steam enging you clearly see the coals burning.
I want to live in a Star Trek Federation post-scarcity world. No need to work unless one wants to, no need for a salary. And that applies to everyone around me too.
That won’t stop population growth. Remember… the stress of work is gone. Now we all can have big happy families if we want without ANY pressure to ever juggle all those stressful conflicting priorities that take up familial resources. Voluntary contraception would not keep population stable or provide a sustainable ecosystem. I personally would have at least six kids. My wife would want more than that. You are free to be childless if you so choose of course, but statistically proven biological imperative drives us to procreate as-is, it’s literally human nature.
The biggest problem will quite literally be real estate. Unless you can picture a fully urbanized earth where everyone lives in tiny little cubby holes and not much else as being some kind of utopia. Even then the land on earth is finite.
Eh? Why does birth rate drop in countries with top economies versus those that don’t?
Developed countries tend to have a lower fertility rate due to lifestyle choices associated with economic affluence where mortality rates are low, birth control is easily accessible and children often can become an economic drain caused by housing, education cost and other cost involved in bringing up children. Higher education and professional careers often mean that women have children late in life. This can result in a demographic economic paradox.sauce
In order to maintain that high quality of life you have to work a shitload and to get those high paying jobs you have to spend years of your life upskilling and competing for better jobs.
Remove the economic factor and give everyone that astounding QOL and boom… we can breed without worries of providing and we don’t even have to stress about maintaining our QOL. We can all be stay at home parents who just raise our kids if we choose to.
I can’t afford a 4-6+++ bedroom house in the Greater Boston area where my friends and family are without having soul-crushing long commute times. I need a commute because I need to work to put food on the table and pay for rent. Remove the barriers and keep at least even QOL and I will not work, i’ll instead devote my time to doing literally anything else.
Missing a lot of other pieces from that same source:
In developing countries children are needed as a labour force and to provide care for their parents in old age. In these countries, fertility rates are higher due to the lack of access to contraceptives and generally lower levels of female education. The social structure, religious beliefs, economic prosperity and urbanisation within each country are likely to affect birth rates as well as abortion rates,
Also:
fertility rates of immigrants to the US have been found to decrease sharply in the second generation as a result of improving education and income.
Quite a bit there that contradicts your thesis of people moving to improved economic situations suddenly wanting 6+ kids and the population growing out of control. If people don’t need kids for labor, don’t need kids to support them in their old age, and women are educated and in control of their own bodies, there is reason to think the world might not even reach replacement rates.
We’re talking about a potential utopia where education is available to everyone, not restricted to first world countries. If you bring everyone UP to western world QOL and they are educated, you have to consider it in that aspect.
The immigrant fertility rate thing is because they come from a place with low expected QOL so they don’t think they need the american dream with air conditioning, going out to eat or having nice things and instead go with more kids because they were raised that way. The second generation gets used to say american QOL and wants to have those same nice things the neighbors have- after all they grow up in the american school system meeting other kids right?.. so you need to work to get those high QOL things and suddenly you’re in the situation I have described: needing more professional attainment to keep up the expected QOL and delaying children.
Does that make sense?
Do you have any kind of evidence showing that free of all financial constraints people will not have children in a mid-high COL area?
Do you have any evidence that free-from-labor and wholly financially stable people would want 6+ kids?
Billionaires basically live in a utopia now and they don’t (generally) have 6+ kids. Musk is considered a weirdo and probably racist for wanting so many “genetically superior” offspring.
I remember a time when someone making “six figures” was extremely wealthy. Now six figures just seems to be the baseline for even having a chance at tackling home ownership in suburban areas. 120k is probably ideal. I don’t likely need more than that and it should be enough to pay for a comfortable lifestyle.
I make $115k per year, my wife makes another $20k or so, we have one kid, a tiny house in a slightly sketch part of our Midwestern city that I bought a decade ago when it was almost cheap, and both our cars are paid off… and we’re treading water financially. I don’t know how anybody my age is affording big houses and new cars, unless it’s just by snowballing debt at an alarming pace. I’m already underfunding my 401k just to maintain some liquidity.
Technique to build familiarity. Obviously doesn’t work on everyone but for those it does it’s quite effective
Literally anyone that’s trying to sell you something whether it’s a product, service or ideology is likely to use it if it may increase their chance of success.
More often this is not the case at all. Constantly repeated someone’s name more often than necessary can be a form of patronizing condescension. This would also make much more sense in OPs context of a Christian apologist condescending to a non believer.
I can see how what you and I described may seem different but it’s in reducing the concept I described to absurdity that derives what you’re talking about. Because it’s true, people use familiarity as an attempt to undermine another. I try to emphasize the good in life but it’s important to recognize that it’s not all roses and rainbows, it’s shit and dirt too.
Ohhh totally forgot about that. Apparently they wanted to do their own thing or something. Doesn’t make sense to me. I’m on lemm.ee so I can sub though
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.