this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
922 points (97.2% liked)

Political Memes

5506 readers
2754 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Register to vote: https://vote.gov

Contact your reps:

Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?Class=1

House of Representatives: https://contactrepresentatives.org/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But if absolutely everyone gets all of that for free, there won't be enough people working just to sustain the ones who won't.

This isn't really a reasonable conclusion though, why could the people doing that work not be incentivised, by being rewarded in some other way than just a bare minimum livelihood? Why would they abandon their station to just do nothing instead ? Doesn't good protection enable the worker to negotiate their work to be fulfilling, rewarding and well compensated? Are the workers not just cogs in the machine if they don't get that power to actually negotiate? ....

It makes no sense to assume nothing would get done if we just had enough to live no matter what, the argument that we'll make more and better things seems much more likely to me. Both are somewhat unknowable until we just do right by people and see it working.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

It's not that "nothing will get done". Sure, some people will work, but much less, if you could get a "fulfilling life" regardless of employment status.

There is already many (quotation needed) people that choose to live off of family members+the state in exchange of some (or a lot) quality of life.

The more you provide for free, the less people will need to work (and some people work only because they need to). This will put more strain on the people that do work, because they are the ones that pay more taxes, which would lead to less luxuries for the people that do actually work.

The higher the production, the higher mean (not median, the rich will always skew the curve a lot) QoL. The idea behind this post aims to increase the median QoL, but I think it'll just bring the mean closer to the median, and shrink the whole thing.