Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
Unless drug dealing without a license is still a crime, in which case a person is taking an a huge risk by choosing to break the law.
If they were making an engineer's salary for 50 years (or even 25 years for that matter), they likely can retire regardless of whether or not UBI is provided to them.
I hope we aren't looking at another 10 pages of this thread talking about human nature. Let's just say I strongly disagree with your assessment.
|
The entire success of UBI rests on human nature.
If one accepts the theory that productivity is actually increasing more rapidly then before and that rapid job loss at a faster rate then job creation is inevitable to occur.
If the above is true then the purpose of UBI is to provide a disincentive for people to seek work so the available jobs matches the available number of workers. If UBI is too large then the disincentive is too large and the cost of labour rises beyond what is able to be sustained and required. Too low and it doesn’t provide the level of support.
It is entirely possible that the level of UBI required to provide a basic standard of living is above the level require to disincentivize the level of work provided by society.
That is entirely predicated on human behaviour.