RE: Debate Forum - Week 8 - Guaranteed Income
@wwf thank you once again for stretching my brain.
From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.
Louis Blanc
In this question you have hit another one of those issues that I have a near constant battle with my cognitive dissonance.
First lets state that the idea of government guaranteed income appears to be the very last thing that would be supported by those that want self-governance that when we tie our income to the government we bind ourselves to them.
I my everyday I deal with a large number of welfare recipients some truly in need, some in need only because they choose to take no personal responsibility , and those again simply enjoying the free money while having no real claim to it.
I have seen people receive $75k AUD per annum because they wont stop having kids, and others I would call unfit parents boasting that they are having another child to get extra pension when the government has already removed children due to violence or neglect.
I have seen those that have legitimate disability have to struggle and fight for every shred of help they can get and single mothers disincentivised from attempting to re-enter the work place because the cost of child care and the loss of social security payment would leave them poorer at the end of the day.
In short our current system is more than a little broken and a guaranteed income is appealing in theory levelling the playing field and providing a truer safety net for those that that find themselves temporarily or permanently unable to work.
You cannot help a man permanently by doing for him what he could or should do for himself.
Rev. William John Henry Boetcker.
There is a lot of debate about inter-generational welfare much of this issue comes from the socioeconomic problems but much also comes from the childs modelling of parents behaviour.
Personally I think that a Guaranteed Income is just a different strategy for the same old thing that is likely to have just as many pit falls.
What I would prefer to see is universal education and universal health care, a government funding of those things help people no longer require social welfare rather than a system that discourages personal responsibility.
This brings up some good points! It seems dangerously close to welfare in my eyes. Here in Canada welfare can be a nightmare, you have to stay on the phone for hours or in line for hours and waste your day talking to people who do not care if something goes wrong with your payment. Some people really need it and others really dont. It hasnt solved any homelessness issues because you need an address or ban account to recieve it!
I think a more human and personalized approach needs to be taken with poverty. I think the government is failing miserably at this, which is historically one of the governments prime initiatives, to improve the lives of the people.
You won't need a bank account or an address, you will be chipped. Go to any bank and get your chip scanned and walk away with your payment.
that is a pretty intimidating thought, yup! I think, that cryptocurrency would be the solution then. I can't see many crypto enthusiasts and anarchists being okay with being chipped.
I haven't decided if crypto currencies will help. The big four banks here in Australia have refused to deal with crypto's, so you can't do anything with them even if you want to. If people become reliant on crypto's, the banks will just say NO MORE - leaving the whales high and dry.
Even stacking has it's problem. There is a $15 mark up on silver. So an ounce costs over $30 and buy back $22 and you cant spend it anywhere. it's only viewed as valuable by other stackers.
The banks have to be careful because they can be left behind. People can trade crypto currencies between one another, completely bypassing the banks. The only reason people need banks is to deal with fiat currency as the government and most corporations don't accept crypto. That could change.
You're so nice for commenting on this post. For that, I gave you a vote!