thinking this is still poison/cancer.. to any hopes for meadows undisturbed ecosystem
ie: h & n property ness et al
douglas rushkoff (@rushkoff) tweeted at 9:05 AM on Wed, Oct 10, 2018:
I used to be a fan of Universal Basic Income. Then, I gave a talk at Uber.
Shouldn’t we applaud the developers at Uber — as well as other prominent Silicon Valley titans like Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, bond investor Bill Gross, and Y Combinator’s Sam Altman — for coming to their senses and proposing we provide money for the masses to spend? Maybe not. Because to them, UBI is really just a way for them to keep doing business as usual.
When people eventually become too poor to continue working as drivers or paying for rides, UBI supplies the required cash infusion for the business to keep operating.
exactly.. 1\ it feeds the system 2\ it (the measuring ness of it) compromises the human spirit
To the rescue comes UBI. The policy was once thought of as a way of taking extreme poverty off the table. In this new incarnation, however, it merely serves as a way to keep the wealthiest people (and their loyal vassals, the software developers) entrenched at the very top of the economic operating system. Because of course, the cash doled out to citizens by the government will inevitably flow to them.
Meanwhile, UBI also obviates the need for people to consider true alternatives to living lives as passive consumers. *Solutions like platform cooperatives, alternative currencies, favor banks, or employee-owned businesses, which actually threaten the status quo under which extractive monopolies have thrived, will seem unnecessary. Why bother signing up for the revolution if our bellies are full? Or just full enough?
i would say.. those aren’t *solutions.. not deep enough.. they too perpetuate the status quo.. of us measuring each other.. measuring transactions.. that’s poison to the soul
No, income is nothing but a booby prize. If we’re going to get a handout, we should demand not an allowance but assets. That’s right: *an ownership stake.
no no no.. *ownership is poison to the soul as well
The wealth gap in the United States has less to do with the difference between people’s salaries than their assets.
doesn’t matter.. both are unhealthy
No amount of short-term entitlements substitute for real assets because *once the money is spent, it’s gone — straight to the very people who already enjoy an excessive asset advantage.
*assets can be gone just as easy – we need to go after something that doesn’t burn out..but rather something that makes us come alive.. and keeps us alive.. ie: cure ios city.. because what the world needs most to get there.. is the energy of 7bn alive people
Likewise, if Silicon Valley’s UBI fans really wanted to repair the economic operating system, they should be looking not to universal basic income but universal basic assets, first proposed by Institute for the Future’s Marina Gorbis. As she points out, in Denmark — where people have public access to a great portion of the nation’s resources — a person born into a poor family is just as likely to end up as wealthy as peers born into a wealthier household.
i’d go for universal basic access.. not assets.. the ownership piece is killer.. huge diff
from marian’s line to uba:
In designing Universal Basic Assets we take into account access to traditional physical and financial assets like land and money, as well as the growing pools of digital assets (data, digital currencies, reputations, etc.). We also recognize and assign value to exchanges we engage in as a part of maintaining the social fabric of our society but that do not currently carry with them monetary value (caring, creative output, knowledge generation, etc.).
digital currencies.. reputations.. value exchanges.. anything that is measuring us.. and our transactions.. all killers..
(ubi) It’s hush money.
Whether its proponents are cynical or simply naive, UBI is not the patch we need. A weekly handout doesn’t promote economic equality — much less empowerment. The only meaningful change we can make to the economic operating system is to *distribute ownership, control, and governance of the real world to the people who live in it.