Huh? "line-of-business software for foodservice" and "line-of-business software to do customer relations" seem like incredibly mundane examples.
> your food truck business in Flint isn't guaranteed to succeed in an UBI world because people may opt to spend their money elsewhere
Yep! So the food truck would fail not because it is in a community mired in poverty, but because it didn't make good business choices or achieve a worthwhile purpose _as judged by those whom its work impacted_.
The core of your thesis seems to be that if given the freedom, people would turn naturally to behavior that destroys themselves and others. I'll grant thats true for up to 4% of the population, but what's stopping that 4% from silently spitting in your hamburger nowadays? You can't make a riot with 4 shitheads surrounded by 96 non-shitheads who have a sense of ownership of their community.
(But if the commercial real estate is owned by Berkshire Hathaway rather than your pewmate's uncle? Well, then fuckit. Why intervene?)
Generally, people are not total fools. They make tragic and silly choices sometimes, especially under stress. I've been to enough meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous to attest to that. But a free people left to their own devices will seek meaning and purpose by investing in relationships and churches and passion-projects. Or are you unaware of the phenomenons of people gardening and babysitting for relatives or teaching free community classes?
They are. The contrived part is your characterization of succeeding in Flint vs New York.
>So the food truck would fail not because it is in a community mired in poverty, but because it didn't make good business choices ...
Which is the case today!! There are businesses succeeding in low income communities. There is no level of income low enough that a market cannot operate in. UBI does not improve that. What business needs is a stable climate and business friendly policies. If a low-income community has issues with crime (or war, or civil strife) or the government is hostile to private business, that's a bigger factor than the fact it is a low-income community.
>The core of your thesis seems to be that if given the freedom, people would turn naturally to behavior that destroys themselves and others
Not 'freedom'. If the people's ability to work and provide themselves is taken away, then yes, it will lead to major societal issues. UBI does not solve that. There is something that changes when you go from providing for yourself, to have some other entity provide for you.
Huh? "line-of-business software for foodservice" and "line-of-business software to do customer relations" seem like incredibly mundane examples.
> your food truck business in Flint isn't guaranteed to succeed in an UBI world because people may opt to spend their money elsewhere
Yep! So the food truck would fail not because it is in a community mired in poverty, but because it didn't make good business choices or achieve a worthwhile purpose _as judged by those whom its work impacted_.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The core of your thesis seems to be that if given the freedom, people would turn naturally to behavior that destroys themselves and others. I'll grant thats true for up to 4% of the population, but what's stopping that 4% from silently spitting in your hamburger nowadays? You can't make a riot with 4 shitheads surrounded by 96 non-shitheads who have a sense of ownership of their community.
(But if the commercial real estate is owned by Berkshire Hathaway rather than your pewmate's uncle? Well, then fuckit. Why intervene?)
Generally, people are not total fools. They make tragic and silly choices sometimes, especially under stress. I've been to enough meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous to attest to that. But a free people left to their own devices will seek meaning and purpose by investing in relationships and churches and passion-projects. Or are you unaware of the phenomenons of people gardening and babysitting for relatives or teaching free community classes?