the whole concept of cryptocurrency is that the individual can do what they like with their own money. They are their own bank, when they make a purchase no-one should question what that purchase was. UBI, the government will control your spending habits, they will be able to track what you spend your money on. These two ideas dont mix at all, like water and oil.
Not sure its the "whole" concept. UBI could be established any number of ways with blockchain technology that would have nothing to do with BTC or any other altcoin. Regardless, the vast majority of transactions are public anyway, and it will not take much effort to pour it all into a dataset to parse out owners, so...
As far as restricting what the token can be spent on to eliminate spending on undesirable goods, people will find a way to exchange the tokens for cash and just buy the stuff anyways. Even if you would only be allowed to exchange tokens with registered merchants, there will always be merchants who would provide an innocent looking good that can then be exchanged for cash, like prepaid phone cards for example.
One thing to keep in mind.
Automation will eliminate a large percentage of jobs.
Sure...it's supposed to make NEW jobs..but those who's jobs were eliminated won't be qualified to take the new jobs...so they're outa luck.
so...whatcha gonna do?
Let em starve?
what are you going to do with all the street people..
Which is more expensive...welfare or basic income?
which is more effective?
I don't like the idea of UBI at all. And the fact that they are being advocated for by elitists should be a concern for many. No decent, free society should need a system of hand outs for all. Yes people who are struggling or infirm should be helped as it is right and just to do so, however once you get to the point of handing out free money/food stamps/tokens to all I fear electronic tyranny will closely follow.
The best way to manage what citizens spend their handouts on would be an embedded chip system which could be switched on or off at the whim of TPTB and I fear that accepting this totalitarian-tip-toe of having us accept such a system would start with getting people hooked on freebies.
I love blockchain technology and crytocurrencies and it would be devastating if they ended up being used to enslave people by the elites they were designed to help us escape from.
Just my opinion of course however take a look a this:-
I'm sure some of you reading this will be aware already but for those who aren't UBI may be the worsed kind of Trojan horse. @tremendospercy
I believe that Universal Basic Income is a great idea.
I believe that Universal Basic Income is a terrible idea.
Good:
All egotistical judgement aside about how it spent, etc., every citizen deserves to benefit from civilization's achievements, even if the technocracy takes over, automates all the jobs, makes everything illegal, and drugs and brainwashes us all. The technocracy was built on exploited work by all of us and all our ancestors and we all deserve to survive. Regardless of how the markets are affected or currencies fluctuate from UBI policies there is one fundamental truth: People with nothing have nothing to work with to survive. No matter how meager or "generous", with UBI at least people are able to try to creatively survive with something somehow.
Looks pretty. Looks pretty dangerous.
Bad:
Universal Basic Income, I suspect, is a dark Trojan horse. Initially the idea will be accepted, like nice pensions and other deferred investments that seem like good ideas - then the corporatocracy elites will fuck everyone over! All the sheeple will settle into their moderately uncomfortable but barely survivable existence on UBI while the technocracy grows ever more power - then they'll pull the rug out and countless lives will be destroyed, discarded, and forgotten, following the predictable pattern of establishment elite overlords.
IT'S A TRAP! But it's necessary now. All of modern society is a rigged game trap and always has been. UBI just might be the final solutions, er, I mean, final chapter.
Disagree with the bad outcome because while there might be elements of truth within it, I think there's alot to be said for the power of personal responsibility. Regardless of what agendas might be going down in the back halls of government and politics, every citizen with internet access has the capability to educate themselves and create opportunities to adapt to the unfolding of change, regardless of whether it's driven by "an elite" or not. So while there might be validity to the "Bad" side, I don't see any purpose in pointing fingers and labelling it as such, because ultimately, citizens who lazily wait around to be provided for bring it upon themselves should they get fucked in the end, as they could have been hustling to stay ahead of the curve instead of watching TV and expending their time and energy in non-constructive outlets.
And the flipside with some potential good, were the bad to go down - maybe the world would be better with the stupid, lazy, self-entitled, extreme fundamentalists, and non-contributors to society wiped out. Maybe that'd even be necessary for human evolution, if there actually is something to the "survival of the fittest" theory. So who knows - maybe even the "bad" could be serving some "good" in the larger context, were the "bad" actually as painted...
Government (and all that entails, including their corporate overlords), do we need it?
The average person is stupider than average, or stupidly close.
Most people want "leaders" and many people need leaders. This is a nice way of saying that sheeple like being pets of their benevolent dictators. They think less responsibility is a nice trade to be lunch for fat vampires.
Until Trump stumped most people cared more about football and/or talent shows, and probably still do. The mesmerizing vampires will never allow the massive citizenry to educated themselves much less rise up.
So do the sheeple "deserve" what they get/let happen to them? Are these "uneducated masses" even worthy to survive?
I can tell you one thing. I believe people should not be trapped and whatever follows.
Some of those "uneducated" people are too busy to get educated because they're doing good things with their lives - or doing bad things with their lives - or doing bad thinking it's good. It's complicated. Some are looking for a job while some have three jobs. Some are raising families. Some are raising really big uneducated families. From Honey Boo Boo to Brad Pitt to Mitt Romney, some big families are struggling some are not. Who deserves to thrive and prosper and who does not?
Sadly, we're all already trapped in the inter-meshed rigged systems of the establishment. Everyone, conscious or not, educated or not, historically and presently, we all serve the rudderless full bore "civilization" machine in countless ways, no matter how much we may try not to.
Rise up! Resist as much, as hard, and as long as possible! #FightElitesNotEachOther
Vote for me and I'll bring back the royal guillotine.
Long live the guillotine!
Love the idea of restricting token usage. It's like you want to help the bum, but you knoew that if you give him money he would spend it on drugs... This would kind of solve the problem. Great post as always !
If I understand your argument correctly, UBI would be carefully controlled as to what it was used to pay for, i.e. rent food, etc.
Wouldn't that just free up any other exchangeables an individual would have to spend on drugs, alcohol, gambling etc?
Does the argument then become that at least the junkies will have food and shelter?
The proponents of this concept, obviously don't understand the societal value of exchange. And the mental well being that comes with gainful employment.
I find it interesting too that the people who are proponents are all too happy to use someone else's money to fund this.
Oh, wait, Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, I stand corrected.
none of this is to suggest it would eliminate addiction or promote laziness so people didn't have to work.
though as @everittdmickey wrote above - the other component to this system, which perhaps I failed to address even briefly in this post, is that millions of jobs will soon be extinct due to automation, robots taking over jobs...
at that point, how are people supposed to achieve the well-being coming with gainful employment when there aren't jobs for them?
no system - UBI, welfare, or otherwise - will ever be perfect. though at least with a UBI, people's basic needs would be covered to provide them the time and freedom for the stress of scrambling to pay rent and put food on the table, such that they could be a bit more relaxed in transitioning into a more entrepreneurial framework and achieve a similar well-being by working on projects of their choice.
re: funding... keep in mind that the U.S. government has no problem paying $1.45 TRILLION for a jet. Maybe it's about time for some shifting priorities and reallocation of resources, as the cost of that ONE plane alone could pretty pay to feed the entire country for a year...
I agree with your point about the funding. The problem is that the people who would be in charge of funding UBI are the very ones who are spending trillions of dollars empire building. And the tentacles of the Military Industrial Complex are so intertwined with the way government works nowadays I don't think it's possible to separate the two. They also haven't done a great job as the trustees of social security.
such, this dialogue extends far further than a single blog post, as the model - to really grasp a complete picture of how it could be effective - requires a look at a much broader ecosystem...
i.e. "the people in charge of spending..."
by the point UBI might actually be ready for implementation, alot will have changed. this could also very well include the nature of democracy and taxation, as blockchain applications could upgrade voting and taxation systems in order to put increasing democratic power in the hands of citizens so their votes count in both selecting representatives and allocating tax budgets...
"* the tentacles of the Military Industrial Complex are so intertwined with the way government works nowadays*"...
yes. nowadays. yet, times are changing. and many working within the cryptodomains have at their core philosophies the acknowledgement of this systematic corruption and value systems being reflected in the developments underway, to which one of the idealized outcomes may be the dissolution of such centralized systems' power...
it may take some time, but there is an untangling in effect.
it might not be possible to fully separate the two. but, the larger ecosystem dynamics are inevitably shifting, such that governmental power/control may decrease, and decision-making power is more equally distributed such that resource allocation becomes far more effective and there becomes a far greater degree of accountability to taxpayers.
the whole concept of cryptocurrency is that the individual can do what they like with their own money. They are their own bank, when they make a purchase no-one should question what that purchase was. UBI, the government will control your spending habits, they will be able to track what you spend your money on. These two ideas dont mix at all, like water and oil.
Not sure its the "whole" concept. UBI could be established any number of ways with blockchain technology that would have nothing to do with BTC or any other altcoin. Regardless, the vast majority of transactions are public anyway, and it will not take much effort to pour it all into a dataset to parse out owners, so...
not if you're projecting an ideology onto cryptocurrency and remain inflexible in broadening its potential uses outside of your ideal...
As far as restricting what the token can be spent on to eliminate spending on undesirable goods, people will find a way to exchange the tokens for cash and just buy the stuff anyways. Even if you would only be allowed to exchange tokens with registered merchants, there will always be merchants who would provide an innocent looking good that can then be exchanged for cash, like prepaid phone cards for example.
One thing to keep in mind.
Automation will eliminate a large percentage of jobs.
Sure...it's supposed to make NEW jobs..but those who's jobs were eliminated won't be qualified to take the new jobs...so they're outa luck.
so...whatcha gonna do?
Let em starve?
what are you going to do with all the street people..
Which is more expensive...welfare or basic income?
which is more effective?
yep - this is another key part of the argument.
I don't like the idea of UBI at all. And the fact that they are being advocated for by elitists should be a concern for many. No decent, free society should need a system of hand outs for all. Yes people who are struggling or infirm should be helped as it is right and just to do so, however once you get to the point of handing out free money/food stamps/tokens to all I fear electronic tyranny will closely follow.
The best way to manage what citizens spend their handouts on would be an embedded chip system which could be switched on or off at the whim of TPTB and I fear that accepting this totalitarian-tip-toe of having us accept such a system would start with getting people hooked on freebies.
I love blockchain technology and crytocurrencies and it would be devastating if they ended up being used to enslave people by the elites they were designed to help us escape from.
Just my opinion of course however take a look a this:-
I'm sure some of you reading this will be aware already but for those who aren't UBI may be the worsed kind of Trojan horse.
@tremendospercy
I believe that Universal Basic Income is a great idea.
I believe that Universal Basic Income is a terrible idea.
Good:
All egotistical judgement aside about how it spent, etc., every citizen deserves to benefit from civilization's achievements, even if the technocracy takes over, automates all the jobs, makes everything illegal, and drugs and brainwashes us all. The technocracy was built on exploited work by all of us and all our ancestors and we all deserve to survive. Regardless of how the markets are affected or currencies fluctuate from UBI policies there is one fundamental truth: People with nothing have nothing to work with to survive. No matter how meager or "generous", with UBI at least people are able to try to creatively survive with something somehow.
Bad:
Universal Basic Income, I suspect, is a dark Trojan horse. Initially the idea will be accepted, like nice pensions and other deferred investments that seem like good ideas - then the corporatocracy elites will fuck everyone over! All the sheeple will settle into their moderately uncomfortable but barely survivable existence on UBI while the technocracy grows ever more power - then they'll pull the rug out and countless lives will be destroyed, discarded, and forgotten, following the predictable pattern of establishment elite overlords.
IT'S A TRAP! But it's necessary now. All of modern society is a rigged game trap and always has been. UBI just might be the final solutions, er, I mean, final chapter.
I agree with the good.
Disagree with the bad outcome because while there might be elements of truth within it, I think there's alot to be said for the power of personal responsibility. Regardless of what agendas might be going down in the back halls of government and politics, every citizen with internet access has the capability to educate themselves and create opportunities to adapt to the unfolding of change, regardless of whether it's driven by "an elite" or not. So while there might be validity to the "Bad" side, I don't see any purpose in pointing fingers and labelling it as such, because ultimately, citizens who lazily wait around to be provided for bring it upon themselves should they get fucked in the end, as they could have been hustling to stay ahead of the curve instead of watching TV and expending their time and energy in non-constructive outlets.
And the flipside with some potential good, were the bad to go down - maybe the world would be better with the stupid, lazy, self-entitled, extreme fundamentalists, and non-contributors to society wiped out. Maybe that'd even be necessary for human evolution, if there actually is something to the "survival of the fittest" theory. So who knows - maybe even the "bad" could be serving some "good" in the larger context, were the "bad" actually as painted...
Here's the dilemma:
So do the sheeple "deserve" what they get/let happen to them? Are these "uneducated masses" even worthy to survive?
I can tell you one thing. I believe people should not be trapped and whatever follows.
Some of those "uneducated" people are too busy to get educated because they're doing good things with their lives - or doing bad things with their lives - or doing bad thinking it's good. It's complicated. Some are looking for a job while some have three jobs. Some are raising families. Some are raising really big uneducated families. From Honey Boo Boo to Brad Pitt to Mitt Romney, some big families are struggling some are not. Who deserves to thrive and prosper and who does not?
Sadly, we're all already trapped in the inter-meshed rigged systems of the establishment. Everyone, conscious or not, educated or not, historically and presently, we all serve the rudderless full bore "civilization" machine in countless ways, no matter how much we may try not to.
Rise up! Resist as much, as hard, and as long as possible! #FightElitesNotEachOther
Vote for me and I'll bring back the royal guillotine.
Long live the guillotine!
Well written - Well thought out - well done!
Indeed "Exciting times ahead..."
Yes, we are in changing times, let's be grateful that were the first ones to know!
Love the idea of restricting token usage. It's like you want to help the bum, but you knoew that if you give him money he would spend it on drugs... This would kind of solve the problem. Great post as always !
If I understand your argument correctly, UBI would be carefully controlled as to what it was used to pay for, i.e. rent food, etc.
Wouldn't that just free up any other exchangeables an individual would have to spend on drugs, alcohol, gambling etc?
Does the argument then become that at least the junkies will have food and shelter?
The proponents of this concept, obviously don't understand the societal value of exchange. And the mental well being that comes with gainful employment.
I find it interesting too that the people who are proponents are all too happy to use someone else's money to fund this.
Oh, wait, Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, I stand corrected.
none of this is to suggest it would eliminate addiction or promote laziness so people didn't have to work.
though as @everittdmickey wrote above - the other component to this system, which perhaps I failed to address even briefly in this post, is that millions of jobs will soon be extinct due to automation, robots taking over jobs...
at that point, how are people supposed to achieve the well-being coming with gainful employment when there aren't jobs for them?
no system - UBI, welfare, or otherwise - will ever be perfect. though at least with a UBI, people's basic needs would be covered to provide them the time and freedom for the stress of scrambling to pay rent and put food on the table, such that they could be a bit more relaxed in transitioning into a more entrepreneurial framework and achieve a similar well-being by working on projects of their choice.
re: funding... keep in mind that the U.S. government has no problem paying $1.45 TRILLION for a jet. Maybe it's about time for some shifting priorities and reallocation of resources, as the cost of that ONE plane alone could pretty pay to feed the entire country for a year...
I agree with your point about the funding. The problem is that the people who would be in charge of funding UBI are the very ones who are spending trillions of dollars empire building. And the tentacles of the Military Industrial Complex are so intertwined with the way government works nowadays I don't think it's possible to separate the two. They also haven't done a great job as the trustees of social security.
such, this dialogue extends far further than a single blog post, as the model - to really grasp a complete picture of how it could be effective - requires a look at a much broader ecosystem...
i.e. "the people in charge of spending..."
by the point UBI might actually be ready for implementation, alot will have changed. this could also very well include the nature of democracy and taxation, as blockchain applications could upgrade voting and taxation systems in order to put increasing democratic power in the hands of citizens so their votes count in both selecting representatives and allocating tax budgets...
yes. nowadays. yet, times are changing. and many working within the cryptodomains have at their core philosophies the acknowledgement of this systematic corruption and value systems being reflected in the developments underway, to which one of the idealized outcomes may be the dissolution of such centralized systems' power...
it may take some time, but there is an untangling in effect.
it might not be possible to fully separate the two. but, the larger ecosystem dynamics are inevitably shifting, such that governmental power/control may decrease, and decision-making power is more equally distributed such that resource allocation becomes far more effective and there becomes a far greater degree of accountability to taxpayers.
of course, this is all a long-term game.
Thanks for the intelligent discourse. Wow, that's really refreshing.
your welcome. happy to hear. :-)
Карл Маркс...)))
I believe universal basic income is possible with cryptocurrency. Maybe someday yes?