"From the last three lines of your post, I'm assuming you are applying the "better safe than sorry" mentality to life-rights over all of time. This addresses points 3) and 5) of my post on Wed 5/15, but does not address points 1),…"
I Power
Scientific Research & Self-Development Activism
Welfare for everyone?
There is a political party in my country that want`s to start with something they call "citizen pay". This means that every citizen would get a sum per month regardless of financial situation. The sum that is proposed is roughly enough to rent an apartment and eat. So the meaning of this is to ensure that everyone has something to live of.
obviously many are afraid that many would just take these money and stop working. So i wanted to know what you would have done if you were given enough money to live and eat without having to work or applying for welfare.
and if anyone can explain if this would inflate the economy. If people had more money i`m sure prices would rise.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Will Hope on -
There would be no incentive to do menial tedious jobs just as there is none right now, unless
the pay is fair. I wouldn't mind cleaning your toilet everyday if you paid me enough. Perhaps the supply and demand of jobs and wages will find a fairer balance with citizen pay.
-
Permalink Reply by Bart on -
the citizen pay would just be added to your normal pay.
so if i paid you to clean my toilet you would get paid for cleaning my toilet and citizen pay.
the incentive for money is still there, you just don`t have to wash my toilet too have roof and food. you would already have enough money for basic necessities. the money you would get for work can be used for heroin, hookers and everything else that`s fun.
-
Permalink Reply by Will Hope on
-
Since I get paid already, I wouldn't want to clean your toilet now. You'd have to pay More than you previously had in order to make me want to do it. Thus, you'll offer more money. But maybe i'll stop cleaning half-way and think nevermind, I don't need to do this anyways.
-
Permalink Reply by Bart on
-
then you would have to live with only the base-necessities again. The citizen pay is just to make sure everyone has the means to stay alive. if that is fine with you then you can. but i won`t pay you for just cleanin my toilet half-way
-
Permalink Reply by Tim Young on -
We had a scheme here called "work for the dole" - the dole being slang for unemployment benefits (government funded money for living expenses for the unemployed) which I thought had merit.
Whenever people get money for free without having to make any effort - there will be complacency and rorting of the system. I like the idea of at least having to do some sort of community service (or whatever) type work in order to get any such benefits.
-
Permalink Reply by Bart on
-
working also gives much more than money, like satisfaction for completing a task, social network, stability (a place to return to), challenges (feel free to add positive/negative sides of working).
so i guess there could still be people left wanting to work.
The thing i`m most concerned about this idea is that people that want a particular kind of work would not work unless they got that job they wanted.
-
Permalink Reply by Tim Young on
-
Yes I agree. Reward for effort so to speak. The trouble with handouts is that people quickly come to believe that it is their right to get stuff for free without having to lift a finger. Complacency can then quickly ensue.
-
Permalink Reply by Bart on
-
Social tendencies would also help to keep people working. since it is frowned upon to not contribute to society.
-
Permalink Reply by Tim Young on
-
This is probably true however those people who tend to take advantage of the "system" are I would imagine probably not the types of people to be concerned with such moralistic issues.
-
Permalink Reply by Bart on
-
there will always be people who will take advantage of welfare ordnances. i think it would be best to just accept the fact that some people will not work, and you would just waste a lot of effort trying to force them to work by starving them.
-
Permalink Reply by Tim Young on
-
If someone gets hungry enough then I am sure they will eventually work it out.
if someone is incapable of work that is one thing.
But if someone is able bodied and capable of working then personally I am not interested in living in a society which condones them living off the contributions of others for zero effort.
Forum
The ethical implications of "Temporal Isolation"
Started by Aya in Off-Topic. Last reply by Aya 19 hours ago. 34 Replies 1 Like
Condemning others to validate ourselves.
Started by Lore in I Power: Self-Development Activism. Last reply by Anthony D yesterday. 7 Replies 0 Likes
Lexical argumentation and its merit
Started by Anthony D in Off-Topic. Last reply by Anthony D on Thursday. 21 Replies 0 Likes
Latest Activity
Isaac Renshaw joined The Shiznit's group
Creating Your Own "Crew"
This is a Group for people who are interested in the idea of expanding I-Power by encouraging our members to create I-Power/SDA related cell groups, or "Crews" in their own communities.See More
Isaac Renshaw joined The Shiznit's group
The Transition Movement
The Transition Movement is a grassroots Network of communities that are working to build resilience in response to peak oil, climate change, and economic instability. Utilizing various concepts such as Permaculture and Local Currency systems, the…See More
Anthony D replied to Lore's discussion Condemning others to validate ourselves."An issue in the context of your reply is the so-called "mad/bad debate". And it very much plays into the perception of these rather extreme forms of criminal behavior.
From a legal and forensic psychological standpoint a…"
Lore replied to Lore's discussion Condemning others to validate ourselves."Interesting. I think that just being aware that our behavior is not always justified and taking on some personal responsibility can go a long way."
Lore replied to Lore's discussion Condemning others to validate ourselves."Maybe I take empathy and attempting to understand such actions by people to the extreme, but I think it is important to understand the causes of such behavior. You do bring up a good point about school shootings Nathaniel, in that the media makes…"
Nathaniel Mortazavi replied to Lore's discussion Condemning others to validate ourselves."I agree with the principle to an extent. However, in the case of school shooters, I don't think it can be justified. Same with rape. There's definitely a line, but like you said, those are the most extreme cases.
On the topic of mass…"
Graham James Collins posted a status"The serious consideration of the Mars-one application. What extreme ramifications this new world discovery will play."
Rob replied to Lore's discussion Condemning others to validate ourselves." Taking the time to understand someone is harder to do when the behavior can be considered abhorrent. What is being discussed in the comments section is very…"
© 2013 Created by Reese Leysen.
