RE: Comment: Dan Larimer's Basic Income Vs Unconditional Basic Income (Reply to @teamSteem)
Some people will experience unfortunate circumstances which make them more likely be unable to produce value for society. Wanting to help those people is a good instinct, and people do so naturally.
Giving people a guarantee that they'll survive if they add no value to society encourages people to freeload even though they don't need to. More and more people will do it as it becomes more acceptable, and fewer and fewer people will produce value. Those that do produce value will be the ones paying for freeloaders and taking on the load created by everyone else. The producers of value totally have a right to judge others as freeloading. Growing food is objectively more valuable than drawing pictures.
If UBI is financed through forced participation (e.g. taxes) it is immoral because it is theft. UBI sounds great to me if it can be financed voluntarily, but that's just called good old fashioned community support.
Empirical data shows differently. When people are given the means, they want to work and create value. Both UBI and cash transfer schemes have produced positive results
https://list.ly/list/1RdG-ubi-research-links-universal-basic-income-evidence
You say "Growing food is objectively more valuable than drawing pictures". I'm sure there are people in the world that want to be farmers but can't because of financial restraints.
It really depends on whose perspective we look from.
No doubt UBI will shake things up quite a bit. In the UK, it would turn out to be cheaper on the taxpayer.
With regard to enforced taxation being theft, that's another matter.
I mention UBI because it sounds like a basis for a healthier, happier and more productive society, compared to the current system or universal credit. I would prefer to contribute to something like this. I think our natural cynicism would naturally be overcome when we see the long term fruits of schemes like this.
Data sets also say vaccines are safe, in other words data can say what you want it to say. I'll go with what human intuition, common sense and large scale history tells me. I've found they are consistently more accurate than data sets.
Food is objectively more valuable than pretty pictures. Who wants to do what is irrelevant. In a world where we have all the food we need, all the energy and will to get it where it needs to go, and all the renewable land use practices we need to continue indefinitely, then people can draw pictures for a living without me raising an eyebrow when they say it's equally important. It's still not, but I won't care about making a fuss at that point.
Theft is theft. Saying this theft is better than that theft does not compute in my world. You're just used to the theft and feel it's inevitable so you feel fine advocating another form of it.
I don't see an agenda behind Unconditional Basic Income and my intuition tells me it will never be implemented because it's too great a threat. We're more likely to see universal credit/income which is something else entirely. All are still based on a monetary system which also creates problems. Using crytocurrencies aren't necessarily going to solve issues either because either way, the banks will look for a way around it.
Meanwhile, many of those stuck in the system continue to suffer.
I'm not sure who is saying drawing pictures is going to be equally important to a starving family as food is ... I'm confused about where you got that from @Cahlen. I don't believe everyone wants to paint pictures. Secondly, most people would want to work to supplement the unconditional basic income as they'd want to continue living in conditions they're used to or prefer. UBI is not going to be enough to cover some aristocrat's rent in London or Manhattan. It might promote people moving to the countryside and setting up homesteads and farms though. Lack of jobs/survival money is what drives people to cities in the first place.
Thirdly, people generally want to contribute in a meaningful way that benefits society. Just because one person like to draw, using your example, does not mean they won't want to grow food. UBI affords people the time to explore their options and the reality/fantasy behind it. Most would end up doing something that works for them and society.
My post was comparing UBI to another scheme for basic income and not taking into account that moral issues of taxation at all. At this point, I don't have an opinion on the matter yet.
ps: This is not going to sway anyone who thinks tax is theft or that there is an agenda but it explains something about wealth distribution and work issue.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/why-we-should-all-have-a-basic-income