You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: It’s Time for Technology to Serve all Humankind with Unconditional Basic Income
from each according to his abilities.
to each according to his needs.
How well has that worked out?
from each according to his abilities.
to each according to his needs.
How well has that worked out?
I just posted this, so I know you didn't even read it, and yet here you are feeling it necessary to comment. I don't appreciate you posting your uninformed views as a comment on every single one of my posts without even reading them.
We've already covered this and I'm tired of covering it with you. Milton Friedman was not a socialist. Friedrich Hayek was not a socialist. The state of Alaska is not a socialist state. Monopoly is not a game about communism For the love of all the gods, go learn what socialism and communism both actually are, so you can tell the difference between those and capitalism provided with money to create customers.
Markets require money as a means of exchange. No money, no way of conveying demand signals to be met by demand. UBI is simply the provision of enough means to signal demand within free markets. Consumers can choose what to buy, instead of government bureaucrats telling them what they need, and depriving them of the ability to signal their demand for private goods and services.
Since you don't seem to care to read anything I have to say on the topic, I suggest listening to why libertarian economist Mike Munger thinks UBI is a good idea. He recognizes that it is a fact of life that the government taxes people, and provides goods and services using that tax money. Those of us who care about liberty should care about providing what government provides in a way that minimizes the size of government and maximizes freedom. UBI accomplishes that.
Those of us who care about capitalism should also care about what's happening as has already been happening for decades with the automation of human labor. The percentage of revenue going to wages and salaries has been going down, while the percentage going to profits is going up. Consumer purchasing power is declining because customers are losing the ability to spend. The middle class is eroding, and the capitalism-saving answer is to provide money so as to avoid the collapse of markets starved of consumer demand.
If you like capitalism, and let me just say I certainly do because it works, then you need to get behind the idea that will save it from destroying itself.
I just posted this, so I know you didn't even read it, and yet here you are feeling it necessary to comment. I don't appreciate you posting your uninformed views as a comment on every single one of my posts without even reading them.
I actually did read it. It wasn't hard. You must read very slow.
I asked a simple question. How has it worked out when tried in the past.
You don't seem to want to answer that.
Ok..if you're afraid to discuss your post I won't pressure you.
You did not read something that took me one hour to record reading aloud in a matter of seconds.
And your question is a stupid question, because again, UBI isn't socialism or communism.
"From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs" does not describe UBI. Does it describe the Alaska dividend? How does a universal payment to all Alaskans rich or poor get perceived as "to each according to his needs" in your mind?
How does "from each according to his abilities" describe the funding component of the Alaska dividend that is not based on ability but on who owns natural resources and the idea of charging companies a fee for taking it out of the ground and selling it back to us after they process it?
By the way, you never answer any of my questions. Were Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek socialists or communists?
Answer the question.
nope...milton friedman and friedrich Hyaek were not socialists.
but I didn't mention socialist.
I merely asked how something that had been tried in the past had worked out.
odd thing...speaking out loud doesn't correlate to reading speed.
I find it amusing that you are so defensive...
even more amusing...I agree that there is a serious problem
i suspect that old ways of doing things will not fix a new, never seen before, problem
You seem to imply that UBI has been tried in the past. It has not. There have been successful if limited experiments. But a real UBI has never been implemented.
We all know what the phrase "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" is in reference to. I also have a functioning memory, and know your response over and over again to everything I've written has been the same general response.
Congrats. You're right. Friedman and Hayek were both capitalists who both supported UBI. Understand that and understand why, and UBI becomes a pretty common sense solution to the problem facing us presented by automation.
we need to become an economy based on need not want as we have in our consumerism economy we have now
one more thing.
(two actually)
I don't like your attitude...you're very rude...so this will be my last response.
I dont' see why you say 'matter of seconds' I had over five minutes to leisurely peruse your post.
I admit that I didn't' watch the videos..
Good. Bye.