You really do give up a lot to hold down a job, don't you?

ANM, I think you touched on the "risk" of acting according to our conscience. That's where I and my friends have hesitated in the past, because I think the risk is real.
Remember the joke going around when Obama was first running for president: the employer declares that if Obama is elected, he will go into the company parking lot and lay off those employees with Obama bumper stickers. My then-coworkers thought that joke was pretty funny. Har har har.

But unfortunately it's no joke to many who completely depend on an employer's paycheck. Now with social media a prospective employer is checking for everything they can find about you online. Are there photos of you in the latest anti gun violence march? Maybe your prospective employer is a member of the NRA and now you're off the list of potential employees no matter how skilled and experienced you are. Do you work for a local utility but want to advocate for more renewable energy? Better skip writing that letter to the editor if you want to keep your job.
In the old days they had to have Pinkerton thugs check on you, now it's done with a couple of clicks on a keyboard.

Do I think it's constraining people's right to say what's on their conscience? Yes, absolutely.

Well, there’s a good argument for universal basic income! Much simpler than unemployment, and It keeps you going while you look for a new job more in line with your principles and your former employer deals with the boycott you created when you told everyone on social media why you were fired.

Agree about UBI. And I think it's more likely than not that we'll see it here in the U.S., probably not in my lifetime, but inevitably because of the job losses due to the rise of Artificial Intelligence. There simply won't be enough paying jobs no matter what, and our society will need to provide the basics.

Will be interesting to see if that allows people to feel more free in their civic and political activity.

Sure if we get to the point where technology has taken away so many jobs then it may be necessary. Right now I don't see it as helpful.

The argument for UBI besides on some pure principal is that globalization and automation have made lots of workers simply redundant (maybe immigration to a small degree, I don't actually think it's as large as those others at all). There is absolutely no social need for those workers to be productive period. To a degree that to even call it productivity is a complete misnomer because it's actually not needed or wanted socially. But they still have basic needs as human beings, and if we assume they still have some right to exist ...

I understand one can argue there is a need for work that is not being funded now, that's probably true, and government could fund this, but if neither government nor industry step up to fund it ... then what are we left with? Still a UBI seems an approach likely to fail, as it might all just go into inflation (rising rents, rising healthcare costs etc.), reducing costs of basic necessities seems likelier to succeed.

The great thing about a UBI is that it would free up peoples’ time so that they can agitate for a bigger UBI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

The great thing about a UBI is that it would free up peoples’ time so that they can agitate for a bigger UBI.

---

Interesting. Is that like corporations lobbying for more and greater tax exemptions, aka loopholes? Of course, they "lobby" with envelopes of cash so I guess that's not "agitating."

But we'll have a chance to see UBI in action as Finland begins a trial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lainey

But we'll have a chance to see UBI in action as Finland begins a trial.

---

You know Economics and High Finance have never been my strong suit, but from a Free Market, Capitalist society standpoint, where does the money come from? And what are the expectations for the recipients?

Quote:

---

And what are the expectations for the recipients?

---

They could have expectations and create jobs for the recipients but that's not the way they decided to go. Perhaps they figured a UBI was just more promising. Sometimes I have heard of things requiring volunteering etc. but that's usually unemployment type programs (in other countries) rather than UBI type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lainey

Interesting. Is that like corporations lobbying for more and greater tax exemptions, aka loopholes? Of course, they "lobby" with envelopes of cash so I guess that's not "agitating."

---

I would say that in one case it would be people trying to persuade government to give them more of other peoples’ money, and in the other case it would be the other people trying to persuade government not to take as much.