You're viewing a single thread.
I mean okay...
But then what? Should I keep working just to give it to someone else, or should I just join them and let someone else pay for me?
Would you just stop working?
This argument is always brought up when it comes to universal basic income or free housing. It was disproven every time it was tested, but people still believe that everyone else will just stop working if they weren't punished for being alive anymore.
Do you recognize that these sorts of initiatives can have long term affects that are not accurately understood in a small sample sized study over a short period of time?
Yes. But what we do now does absolutely not work so I would give stuff that was tested and works in a small sample size a shot.
It was disproven
You said it was disproven, how can something be disproved if you only tested it during a really short time period? Maybe you meant to say "evidence suggests" but that's much different than something being disproven
Again, you are correct, but you already said that and it changes nothing about what I said in the second comment.
What is your point?
My point is that you said the argument has been disproven when I believe it has yet to be fully understood.
So giving money/homes increases employment in every study of the homeless I've read.
Having a job while homeless is really hard. Getting one without a home is even harder.
If you know of a study that shows otherwise I would love to read it.
People work to improve their material conditions. Material conditions drive society, after all. Do you do household chores at all, or do you let everyone else do them for you?
Communal ownership of property is the only way to truly aim at fulfilling needs and desires, rather than the profit motive.
You already work to give it to someone else.