• unfreeradical@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    UBI would represent a great advancement for the working class.

    It should be plain.

    Also plain is that it will only be achieved through struggle.

    Fighting makes a stronger contribution than analyzing details that are currently only hypothetical.

    • abraxas
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      UBI would represent a great advancement for the working class. It should be plain.

      My whole point for the last 20 comments has been specific, detailed reasons why I think it’s not an advancement for the working class. Is there any reason you won’t address them? If it were plain, there should be answers to my criticisms.

      Fighting makes a stronger contribution than analyzing details that are currently only hypothetical.

      So how often do you fight for things you think are harmful? Why should the Left be flocking to a plan like UBI, one that is often seen as a “centrist compromise” between welfare and laissez faire capitalism? In the US at least, we’re already further to the Left than UBI in many ways, and the working class have better than UBI (even if there’s miles to go to proper socialized welfare).

      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Your objections were against details that are narrow, undetermined, or hypothetical.

        I declined to address your objections on their merits, because I find in them no merit.

        The solution to a car not having any wheels is applying wheels, not lamenting that all cars are dysfunctional because none may ever have wheels.

        The constructive response to any problem is addressing it at the time it occurs, not obsessing over it while also refusing to begin any action.

        Workers who have little income gaining more income, or workers who have precarious income gaining secure income, is obviously not harmful, yet you seem determined to fixate on some particular scenario that makes you feel threatened.

        Workers need income to survive. UBI helps ensure security for everyone.

        • abraxas
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Your objections were against details that are narrow, undetermined, or hypothetical. I declined to address your objections on their merits, because I find in them no merit.

          So the majority are too stupid and unworthy to get explanations, and evidence/studies don’t matter? I mean, these are not contrived or uneducated objections.

          The solution to a car not having any wheels is applying wheels, not lamenting that all cars are dysfunctional because none may ever have wheels.

          A car with only 1 wheel isn’t going anywhere, and there’s no UBI out there offering to give even 2 wheels. But I specifically named plans that come "all-4-wheels-included’ and your response was to insult me as “narrow, undetermined, or hypothetical” with “no merit”.

          The constructive response to any problem is addressing it when it occurs, not obsessing over it while also refusing to begin any constructive action.

          So you’re saying we need to run blindly to the Right when the Left already has proven answers? Why? Capitalism is the problem. Cutting everyone a check in capitalism is still capitalism.

          Workers who have little income having more income, or workers who have precarious income having secure income

          So pay them a living wage not to work (no-questions-asked unemployment) and let their stability leverage better wages. That’ll actually work and cost less than what you’re suggesting.

          is obviously not harmful

          Your use of “obviously” is bad-faith. My whole argument is that blindly cutting a not-nearly-enough check for everyone is “obviously” quite harmful, just like Bush’s tax cuts were.

          yet you seem determined to fixate on some particular scenario that makes you feel threatened.

          I don’t feel threatened. As upper-middle-class I personally do better under UBI than I would under any full-socialization of resources. I don’t care because I have no problem with getting passed over for aid if it’s going to those who really need it. I don’t want a $1000 “Make Welfare Conservative Again” check.

          Workers need income to survived. UBI helps ensure security for everyone.

          Or we can just put wheels on that car and ensure that everyone can survive with or without income. Instead of feeding the alt-right machine.

          I’d like to reiterate (not that you read my replies) that my whole point is that you’re trying to fix a solved problem with an untested capitalist answer that, at best, is 1/2 as good as the solutions we already know will work and for 5x the price.

          And it looks like you have no desire to let all of those on the Left who think UBI is the wrong tool know why we should reconsider. That’s all I’ve been trying to do, give you that opportunity.

          EDIT: Is there anyone ELSE reading this who would be willing to give a good reason why a SocDem or socialist should support UBI instead of just be confrontational? I used to love the idea of it, but I’m really sold on it being the wrong tool of late, and I have to be honest that Yang was a big part of my reasoning for feeling this way.

          • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            For purposes of resolving that UBI helps the working class, your objections are not germane.

            Everyone having some income and especially adequate food is better than some having none.

            It should be extremely uncomplicated.

            • abraxas
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              For purposes of resolving that UBI helps the working class, your objections are not germane.

              I disagree.

              Everyone having some income and especially adequate food is better than some having none.

              That’s like saying “everyone having a Ford F150 is better than some having none”, but money is just bloody paper. Nobody is eating a dollar bill. So no. Everyone having some income is NOT better than some having no income but everyone having a home, food, and healthcare. It IS an either/or choice according to every serious UBI advocate. SHOW me a plan with a non-trivial UBI that also expands welfare, and then we’ll talk.

              It should be extremely uncomplicated.

              Then demonstrate it with uncomplicated facts instead of treating my objections as if only a moron would make them. If you treat the Left like morons, you’ll never get further than Lemmy comments.

              After all this time of you showing non-stop arrogance towards my views, I’ve continued to treat you with respect and try to coax the actual logical basis of what you’re trying to push for. At what point do I just give up and conclude that I was right, that you don’t actually know much about UBI at all?

              • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Everyone having some income and especially adequate food is better than some having none.

                That’s like saying “everyone having a Ford F150 is better than some having none”, but money is just bloody paper.

                No. Your objection is ridiculous. The comparison is absurd.

                You are either deliberately obstructing reason and consensus, or too confused to follow either.

                • abraxas
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  So despite the fact I would love to be convinced that UBI would work, you’d rather just keep insulting me. Have a great day.

                  You are either deliberately obstructing reason and consensus, or too confused to follow either.

                  In almost 30 comments now, you haven’t given ONE GOOD REASON why anyone with a brain should consider UBI. I’ve begged you for them while you insulted me and my intelligence. I’ve gone past giving you the benefit of the doubt and simply made myself look the fool giving you chance upon chance.

                  I guess I’m just “too confused to follow” because being insulted didn’t change my mind :-/

                  • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    The way it “works” is by giving money to those who otherwise would have none or too liitle.

                    Stop being an obscurant.

                  • LemmysMum@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    you haven’t given ONE GOOD REASON why anyone with a brain should consider UBI

                    They gave you dozens, your capacity for cognizance might not be so derelict if you had adequate education, but you lack that for the same reason you choose to lack an understanding of UBI; you’ve never been privy to the resources to allow you to dissuade your ignorance, and you’ve mistakenly assumed your ignorance is as valuable as someone else’s knowledge.