Very well explained Alain. Lennart Thornros On Nov 24, 2016 07:21, "Alain Sepeda" <alain.sep...@gmail.com> wrote:
> UBI can be implement in many way. > Libertarians/Liberalist/FreeMarketFan promote a vision that is intended > to replace charity, yet to keep unconditionally an incentive to work. > > the big recognized problem of todays social safety nets is that it is a > tax, a disincentive on people who get out of poverty. In country like > France this tax may sometime not be far from 90%, if not above 100% (at > least facially at short term). > > another problem I know well is that safety net follow a bourgeoisie vision > of how to behave, of what is good, how to earn your life, how to be > organized... > It may be counter productive. > > Earning your life only by selling garden vegetable, driving for Uber, > babysittng, renting your tools, buying and selling on e-bay, delivering > salad, should not be punished compared to looking for a full-time work in a > factory. > Living in a trail and using all your money to skydive should not be > treated differently as owning a big house and playing in the garden. > > UBI also is , contrary to the myth, promoting MORE work and MORE risk > taking, more investments, more school. It was measured in india with poor > people. > > note that for the UBI to be neutral, it should be associated with a flat > tax that make any way to earn your life as attractive as any other. > > Neutrality is essential, so flat tax and unconditionality are keys. > In fact most people are more intelligent to solve their own problems than > administration (this is the anti-communist moto). they better know where to > invest, BUT if they are in risk of ruin, starvation, death, they refuse to > take risk, and as any financial expert know this mean getting less benefits. > > UBI is a life insurance that promote risk taking, entrepreneur spirit, > investments in education and business... It is also a way to transform a > flat tax system into a globally progressive tax rate, keeping the marginal > tax rate neutral. > UBI can really boost the economy. > > of course it can be implemented wrongly. It will probably be, and many UBI > announces propose something not unconditional, not basic, not neutral. > > For example in France most observers imagine that it will not be > universal, it won't cancel all other charity system, so it will just be a > new fat charity system, not an autonomy enabling system to "laisser-faire" > the people. > > Note that about the disappearance of work, I am opposing this vision. > Work will not disappear. Work will move BACK to a less "factory-style" > notion of job (exploiting submissive taylorized zombies and bureaucratic > managers), and we will go a little back to what is fund in Africa, in Uber, > but not totally as stable workforce is useful (NB: a French company > operating Amazon like online shops in many African countries explained thay > have to improve fidelity and training of a usually Uberized workforce). > > However full-time life-time work will probably not be possible nor > desirable, and people will have multiple activities, including usual work, > but also independent work, off-time businesses, e-bay shops, UberPop > phases, like you see in emerging countries. > > This is why neutral UBI is a key to make full-time-work not a condition to > be protected by the community. > > > > 2016-11-23 22:19 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>: > >> Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> wrote: >> >>> This is neo-communism. >>> >> Yes, it is. Except that instead of exploiting other people's labor, it >> would exploit robots. Robots don't care. They will not be upset. >> >> All of us helped develop robots and computers with our tax money, so we >> should all get the benefits from them. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
