this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
702 points (98.8% liked)

196

5686 readers
1206 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

A UBI without pegging it to the cost of living, without price controls, and without significant changes to our policy around labor would be mind-boggingly bad.

Andrew Yang's branding of UBI as freedom dividend was useful in addressing those issues, because it's no longer about basic, and more about a shared dividend in prosperity, with tax revenue going up with inflation and profit growth, and so dividends going up along side it. UBI is a change in labour policy without planning: The freedom to say no to work, means better quality job offers. The less anyone else wants to work, the easier it is for anyone who wants to, to be rich.

We need drastic change to the way this works, and a UBI is a not-insignificant part of that, but it is only part of it.

It's actually all of it. If your labour is not needed, and profits happen anyway, then we all get a share of that. There is always entrepreneurship, education, retraining to pursue useful contributions to society.