Page 1 of 3
Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:28 pm
by philosopher
In the early through mid-20th century, lower class people blamed the rich for their financial problems:
Not paying enough taxes according to their enormous wealth.
But nowadays the poor working class seems to blame those recieving unemployment benefits/sick or disability relief benefits etc. claiming that they are all cheaters who just dont want to work, while the working people have to do all the dirty work.
But the few politicians who speak their cause all want to abolish the current workfare or even welfare benefits, and replace it with some sort of Basic Income, levelled according to income in a way that still gives incentive to work.
This would cut adminstrative costs of welfare benefits with all its fit-for-work tests etc. and more importantly:
It will create TRUE liberty. Not wage slavery. But true liberty. You actually have a CHOICE to: Work more or less or stop working. If you work more, you get more money, obviously. If you choose to work less, thats fine, but you won't get as much money. The same applies for not working at all.
But, and here's the crucial part:
Those working class labourers doing the tedious, boring and physically damaging work and whom envy those getting welfare benefits, OPPOSE the Basic Income-idea. For no apparant reason.
I don't get it?
If you envy someone for getting money without work, why would you oppose getting the same payment yourself? That would stop your envy.
The only ones going to pay the price are:
* The REALLY rich - not due to taxes, but because they own:
* The employers organizations - because they have to make work more favorable, pleasing and with more benefits as employees to attract employees.
* The Labor Unions - because they win their cause 100 % and then the Labor Union cease to exist, because they have fulfilled their mission entirely. The Labor Union bosses will not earn that much money, because there is not need for the labor unions any longer.
Well, then is also those in government, as they run out of options to control the people through work, incentives, taxes etc.
But for the vast majority of people the implementation of the Basic Income is going to be a liberator. A true liberator, liberating the people from the chains of wage slavery and entering a new era of human rights.
Yet, the poor people seem to not want it at all. They just want to keep bashing those deemed unfit for work and getting entitled to benefits.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:34 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
Do you have any evidence to support these assertions? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think the main reason people would oppose it is because they are either fascists who love to bash beneficiaries (which they could no longer do because everyone would be getting it), or morons who don't understand how it works.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:48 pm
by philosopher
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:34 pm
Do you have any evidence to support these assertions? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think the main reason people would oppose it is because they are either fascists who love to bash beneficiaries (which they could no longer do because everyone would be getting it), or morons who don't understand how it works.
I've been discussing this with several people who are working class people. They all oppose the idea, because they believe it should be a duty to work.
Most people believe it should be a duty, like the way conscription works only that this work duty should last until you get your official retirement. At least, that's the impression I get from discussing this with people from the working class.
It is also the impression I get when I read the newspapers and the polls.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:54 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
philosopher wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:48 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:34 pm
Do you have any evidence to support these assertions? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think the main reason people would oppose it is because they are either fascists who love to bash beneficiaries (which they could no longer do because everyone would be getting it), or morons who don't understand how it works.
I've been discussing this with several people who are working class people. They all oppose the idea, because they believe it should be a duty to work.
Most people believe it should be a duty, like the way conscription works only that this work duty should last until you get your official retirement. At least, that's the impression I get from discussing this with people from the working class.
It is also the impression I get when I read the newspapers and the polls.
I didn't know there was any such thing as the 'working class' any more.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am
by commonsense
In my experience, whenever a position makes no sense, it is because the position is based on emotion, not logical thinking. Because said position cannot be deduced through logical argument, it would usually be expressed as a belief.
I can suggest one possible emotional basis that underpins a paradoxical opposition to Basic Income. Let me state, a priori, that the chronically unemployed and menially tasked employees, on the whole, tend to be less educated and less educable than those in other categories of labor.
I postulate that many individuals, in any but the so-called upper class, are raised with the belief that hard work pays off, or that hard work is its own reward, or that inactivity due to laziness is an indication of poor moral character.
Of the individuals who would benefit from, but oppose, Basic Income, it may be that a self-righteously strong emotional attachment to their belief in the value of hard work forms the basis of their position.
Another emotion that may come into play may be derived from a sense of self worth. In other words, validation of what a person is doing at the moment is sufficient proof to that individual that he is a right and good person.
One more possible explanation of an emotional basis for holding such an illogical position may be fear of change. Fear of replacing the known circumstances, no matter how crummy, with unknown circumstances.
Additionally, it is possible that it is rather easy to misinform the undereducated regarding the effects of Basic Income.
Of course, all that I have expressed above is simply my unsupported belief, my guess as to the rationale for the irrational.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 am
by Impenitent
you can't have something for nothing
"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money" - Thatcher
-Imp
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:00 am
by A_Seagull
philosopher wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:28 pm
In the early through mid-20th century, lower class people blamed the rich for their financial problems:
Not paying enough taxes according to their enormous wealth.
But nowadays the poor working class seems to blame those recieving unemployment benefits/sick or disability relief benefits etc. claiming that they are all cheaters who just dont want to work, while the working people have to do all the dirty work.
But the few politicians who speak their cause all want to abolish the current workfare or even welfare benefits, and replace it with some sort of Basic Income, levelled according to income in a way that still gives incentive to work.
This would cut adminstrative costs of welfare benefits with all its fit-for-work tests etc. and more importantly:
It will create TRUE liberty. Not wage slavery. But true liberty. You actually have a CHOICE to: Work more or less or stop working. If you work more, you get more money, obviously. If you choose to work less, thats fine, but you won't get as much money. The same applies for not working at all.
But, and here's the crucial part:
Those working class labourers doing the tedious, boring and physically damaging work and whom envy those getting welfare benefits, OPPOSE the Basic Income-idea. For no apparant reason.
I don't get it?
If you envy someone for getting money without work, why would you oppose getting the same payment yourself? That would stop your envy.
The only ones going to pay the price are:
* The REALLY rich - not due to taxes, but because they own:
* The employers organizations - because they have to make work more favorable, pleasing and with more benefits as employees to attract employees.
* The Labor Unions - because they win their cause 100 % and then the Labor Union cease to exist, because they have fulfilled their mission entirely. The Labor Union bosses will not earn that much money, because there is not need for the labor unions any longer.
Well, then is also those in government, as they run out of options to control the people through work, incentives, taxes etc.
But for the vast majority of people the implementation of the Basic Income is going to be a liberator. A true liberator, liberating the people from the chains of wage slavery and entering a new era of human rights.
Yet, the poor people seem to not want it at all. They just want to keep bashing those deemed unfit for work and getting entitled to benefits.
I am not sure of your facts, but whether true or not it makes sense to me.
If I were a 'lower class person' - which I am not - I would oppose a universal basic income if it meant the end of work for me and my compatriots. For without work and without making a real contribution to society, we would become entirely redundant, nothing more than a burden on the rest of society. Which might be fine in times of plenty but when a recession comes along - as they always do - we would be left without a means of support and the consequences could be dire.
the problem with basic, assured income
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:40 am
by henry quirk
When has 'from each, according to ability; to each, according to need' ever worked over the long haul?
-----
One reason some poor folks might oppose Basic Income: they don't wanna be parasites, don't wanna rely on others, prefer to take care of themselves rather than be taken care of.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:04 am
by -1-
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 am
you can't have something for nothing
"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money" - Thatcher
-Imp
Right in historical terms. In the new era automatons will do the work; to keep the economy alive in a classic way, people need money to spend, and there is no need for people to produce goods.
This contradicts all Marxist-Leninist, capitalist, feudalist, and slave-labour economies and political superstructures. Historically always humans produced goods, sometimes with greater efficiency, sometimes with lesser, and that caused from time to time an overproduction crisis, sometimes an underproduction crisis, and wars and varying population sizes and growth and varying environmental conditions threw even more monkey wrenches into the fire.
Re: the problem with basic, assured income
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:09 am
by -1-
henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:40 am
When has 'from each, according to ability; to each, according to need' ever worked over the long haul?
Answer: in the future, "everyone according to need", and nobody according to ability. Automatons and AI machines will do the work.
-----
One reason some poor folks might oppose Basic Income: they don't wanna be parasites, don't wanna rely on others, prefer to take care of themselves rather than be taken care of.
That's actually going to be a big problem. People will turn to crime because of the need to produce something meaningful. Most people don't worry about the utter futility and meaninglessness of life, because they are too busy to fulfil mini-meanings and mini-needs: save for a down payment, keep up with the payments, keep buying stuff, pay the doctor.
But with no need to keep busy in order to keep themselves alive and well, the need for meaning may manifest in gang warfare, rape, murder, torture all performed in a near-random way.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:13 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 am
you can't have something for nothing
"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money" - Thatcher
-Imp
Quoting the thatcher neo-liberal kunt. Now that says it all.
There might come a day when no one has to do any work at all. Then who would 'neo-liberal' fascist kunts like you have to look down on?
What is 'work' anyway? Buying and selling foreign currency i.e.'work' that creates nothing and ends up bankrupting countries? Is that 'work'? It might make one individual psychopathic shit-head rich, but is it really 'work'? Most people go off each morning, do nothing productive all day, then go home. Is that work? They say the more elaborate the job title, the more meaningless the job.
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:15 am
by -1-
A_Seagull wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:00 am
For without work and without making a real contribution to society, we would become entirely redundant, nothing more than a burden on the rest of society. Which might be fine in times of plenty but when a recession comes along - as they always do - we would be left without a means of support and the consequences could be dire.
Recessions won't come along in a world in which automatons and AI machines do the production work and service jobs.
And for being "leeches"... if everyone is leeching, it is no longer demeaning to be a leech. It's a peer thing, you know, not pulling your weight when others do. If nobody has to tote the barge and lift the pail, then nobody is going to be shamed and feeling guilty for not lifting the pail.
Then again, my worry is more the loss of meaning of life. For most people the utter futility of our lives are masked by needing to strive for something that we can only strive for with work. So work is the new opiate of the masses, replacing religion. What will be the opiate when work is done by nobody, but machines only?
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:20 am
by -1-
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:13 am
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 am
you can't have something for nothing
"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money" - Thatcher
-Imp
Quoting the thatcher neo-liberal kunt. Now that says it all.
There might come a day when no one has to do any work at all. Then who would 'neo-liberal' fascist kunts like you have to look down on?
What is 'work' anyway? Buying and selling foreign currency--'work' that creates nothing and ends up bankrupting countries? Is that 'work'? It might make one psychopathic shit-head rich, but is it really 'work'?
In your own words,Veggie,what constitutes the difference between these:
- a neo-liberal kunt
- an American crime monger and hate monger and language-grinder kunt;
- a feminist kunt;
- a male chauvinist kunt
- a capitalist kunt
- you, personally
- a religious kunt
- a Muslim kunt
I think we should resign to understand that kunt is a kunt is a kunt, and the definition of it is a "person or institution which pisses VegetarianTaxiDermi off for any of several childish, imbecilic, or unfairly contrived, or even realistic reasons."
Re: Why do lower class people oppose Basic Income?
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:23 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
-1- wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:20 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:13 am
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 am
you can't have something for nothing
"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other people's money" - Thatcher
-Imp
Quoting the thatcher neo-liberal kunt. Now that says it all.
There might come a day when no one has to do any work at all. Then who would 'neo-liberal' fascist kunts like you have to look down on?
What is 'work' anyway? Buying and selling foreign currency--'work' that creates nothing and ends up bankrupting countries? Is that 'work'? It might make one psychopathic shit-head rich, but is it really 'work'?
In your own words,Veggie,what constitutes the difference between these:
- a neo-liberal kunt
- an American crime monger and hate monger and language-grinder kunt;
- a feminist kunt;
- a male chauvinist kunt
- a capitalist kunt
- you, personally
- a religious kunt
- a Muslim kunt
I think we should resign to understand that kunt is a kunt is a kunt, and the definition of it is a "person or institution which pisses VegetarianTaxiDermi off for any of several childish, imbecilic, or unfairly contrived, or even realistic reasons."
Who was talking to you?
Re: the problem with basic, assured income
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:24 am
by -1-
henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:40 am
When has 'from each, according to ability; to each, according to need' ever worked over the long haul?
It worked in the "caveman" economies. In prehistoric times, when people were hunger-gatherers.
The Marxist-Leninist nomenclature of political economy called that economic-political system "prehistoric socialism".