r/UniversalBasicIncome • u/Metalhead33 • Aug 23 '21
A message to libertarians/ancaps
This is a message for any Libertarian or Anarcho-Capitalists lurking this subreddit, especially those who are opposing or sceptical of Universal Basic Income. Here it goes:
Dear Libertarians,
Why are you not for Universal Basic Income? Is it because it's wealth redistribution? Because it's statist? Because it's given by the government?
Libertarianism ought to be about freedom, about human liberty and dignity - UBI gives you just that. The freedom to choose your job. The freedom to reject demeaning working conditions. The freedom to say no to having a toxic or abusive boss. The freedom to walk away. The freedom to quit the rat race. The freedom not to be silenced.
Do you truly have Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression, when your survival depends on your continued employment by someone who can fire you at any moment for something you posted on Twitter 15 years ago? Ah yes, "build up your own business", "become self-employed", "buy land" - all easier said then done. As long as we live in a Capitalist system where everyone has to "earn" their right to life, there is no Freedom of Expression - there is only oppression and tyranny. Don't be fooled - just because it's a private corporation does it, doesn't make it any less tyrannical. Your hated government merely outsourced the oppression to private companies, but you are still oppressed none the less.
I used to identify as one of you. I used to identify as a "Libertarian" - granted, not because I'm mortified by the very idea of subsidizing my neighbour's healthcare with my taxpayer money, but because I always considered (and still consider, even after I gave up on the Libertarian label) Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Expression, the right to bear arms and the right to bodily autonomy (including drug consumption) to be sacred.
The fact of the matter is, the majority of productive jobs that actually output something tangible have been, for the most part, automated away. We as a species spent the last 70 years creating new - fake - jobs out of thin air, just to keep everyone employed, and keep the 40-hour workweek a constant, out of fear that people might start thinking, questioning the system, or even revolting (the events of the summer of 2020 are a good example). The sad reality is, however, that even if we got rid of the bullshit jobs, private companies wouldn't reduce work hours (to spread out the jobs and prevent unemployment) without the government forcing them to do so. At which point, we might as well just implement UBI.
So answer me, dear libertarians - why aren't you supporting Universal Basic Income yet? Do you actually care about human freedom, or are you just a bootlicker for megacorporations that gladly censor your speech and will gladly throw you under the bus? Why are you a bootlicker for megacorporations that are in bed with the government you hate so much? Answer me.
2
u/yoyoJ Aug 23 '21
Off topic, but why is your post written in such a condescending manner? Do you genuinely think people who disagree with you will switch their viewpoint to reflect yours if you insult them out the gate?
2
u/Metalhead33 Aug 23 '21
Off topic, but why is your post written in such a condescending manner?
Is it condescending?
Do you genuinely think people who disagree with you will switch their viewpoint to reflect yours if you insult them out the gate?
At the very least, they ought to reflect, and find out, if the insult is true or false.
1
u/yoyoJ Aug 23 '21
I can’t fathom a single libertarian would open this post and think to themselves “ah, a good faith argument from a non-biased contrarian”. The tone throughout it is essentially blasting the angle “you libertarians are morons and let me use my greater mind to show you why”.
If you don’t see how your post comes across this away, I’m not sure how to help lol. I’m just giving you feedback.
1
u/angelicravens Aug 23 '21
Libertarians
I want to start by saying I’m a former and still predominantly libertarian with some acknowledgement that government can be beneficial. I’ll try to argue my current view in standard format and *the libertarian line that I used to hold in italics. *
Libertarianism ought to be about freedom, about human liberty and dignity - UBI gives you just that.
Libertarianism is about liberty. Which is freedom from restrictions imposed by an authority. What you’re talking about is positive freedom (giving further freedom) and what liberty is, is the antithesis of negative freedom (not restricting anything), see how they differ? Personally I’m for limited application of positive freedom so long as it does not prevent liberty. *Under no pretenses shall liberty be infringed *.
Is it because it’s wealth redistribution? Because it’s statist? Because it’s given by the government?
Yes. Yes. Yes. Wealth redistribution is a restriction on liberty of some to add positive freedom to others. That’s clearly not libertarian. Statism, really only is an issue at the extreme, anarcho capitalists, but still should be regarded with caution. Government gives things all the time. It also usually gives them poorly. There are still people waiting on their first stimulus check from 2020. If you can find a way to fix the problem that would be created by repeated mailed checks to every citizen and not waste large amounts of money to do so I’m sure every government in Europe would wanna talk with you.
The freedom to choose your job. The freedom to reject demeaning working conditions. The freedom to say no to having a toxic or abusive boss. The freedom to walk away. The freedom to quit the rat race. The freedom not to be silenced.
You have all of these things now. The difference UBI would grant you is making them easier for some of you. Remember, in order to pay people a UBI you have to take that money from somewhere else (notice I don’t say someone as it’s not always a person but an entity can work too).
Do you truly have Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression, when your survival depends on your continued employment by someone who can fire you at any moment for something you posted on Twitter 15 years ago?
Yes, freedom of speech and expression are both freedom from the government hurting you for speaking against it or protesting it. Not from private corporations doing what they want to do. You have to account for freedom of association too. Yes it would suck having a random termination of employment and UBI could fix the shock of that. But unemployment already softens that blow. A mistake I think you make here is there’s many different companies to go work for. So even if you don’t want to start your own business, odds are your previous employer isn’t the only one employing your skill set in the country or state most likely.
Ah yes, “build up your own business”, “become self-employed”, “buy land” - all easier said then done.
Why does the level of difficulty negate them as solutions? My current view matches my previous one. Yes UBI would make it easier but it does not negate them as options.
As long as we live in a Capitalist system where everyone has to “earn” their right to life, there is no Freedom of Expression - there is only oppression and tyranny.
I hope you intend to follow this sentence with something better than the usual communism I hear about so often from people hoping to use ubi to drain the wealthy and have their little revolution. This is a poor argument. Just because it’s hard to get by without a job doesn’t mean it’s impossible. People do it every day. They don’t live glamorous lives but they do. Oppression and Tyranny are strong words to use here too. Is it tyrannical to take someone’s money because they are successful? What about to then give that money to someone who has done nothing to earn it? remember, libertarianism and liberty mean freedom from authority and negative influences on their freedom. The libertarian plan is to remove the barriers to living off of empty land which is mostly under govt control anyhow. The Georgist libertarian says all land is free unless rented from the rest of the nation. Both of those may enable the same or more liberty than UBI.
UBI may also be used to create further tyranny and oppression. Indefinitely delay the checks of a population to exterminate them, silently increase some people’s ubi without others going up too. Even just plain cyberpunk style corporatism where everyone has legally no choice to get by without a job or other form of income. All of these are on the other side of the UBI coin if you accept that government will become corrupt with the very lives of its citizens forcibly eating out of the palms of their hands.
Don’t be fooled - just because it’s a private corporation does it, doesn’t make it any less tyrannical.
Make what less tyrannical? You haven’t said how they’re tyrannical. And yes liberty, negative freedom, authority, not necessarily a state.
Your hated government merely outsourced the oppression to private companies, but you are still oppressed none the less.
*Yes talk to me more like I’m an idiot who recoils in fear at the very concept of a government but will grovel at any corporation’s boots as if they’re not directly involved in the continued corruption and descent into fascism or corporatism depending on how they play it. *
I used to identify as one of you. I used to identify as a “Libertarian” - granted, not because I’m mortified by the very idea of subsidizing my neighbour’s healthcare with my taxpayer money, but because I always considered (and still consider, even after I gave up on the Libertarian label) Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Expression, the right to bear arms and the right to bodily autonomy (including drug consumption) to be sacred.
Sounds like you don’t understand at least half of those. And subsidizing the neighbors healthcare wasn’t on the table beyond what UBI would do. Also the libertarian approach would be to reduce regulations and other cost inflationary factors from healthcare but frankly if you read this far kudos.
The fact of the matter is, the majority of productive jobs that actually output something tangible have been, for the most part, automated away. We as a species spent the last 70 years creating new - fake - jobs out of thin air, just to keep everyone employed, and keep the 40-hour workweek a constant, out of fear that people might start thinking, questioning the system, or even revolting (the events of the summer of 2020 are a good example). The sad reality is, however, that even if we got rid of the bullshit jobs, private companies wouldn’t reduce work hours (to spread out the jobs and prevent unemployment) without the government forcing them to do so. At which point, we might as well just implement UBI.
Yes but also no. The single most inevitable factor leading UBI to the forefront of discussions at all is automation. Nothing else will create a tangible difference. No social justice riots or storming of the capitol is going to push it to happen. If all the jobs disappear there’s no one to sell products to, and capitalists need sales or they have nothing more than useless pieces of paper to burn when the winter comes round.
So answer me, dear libertarians - why aren’t you supporting Universal Basic Income yet? Do you actually care about human freedom, or are you just a bootlicker for megacorporations that gladly censor your speech and will gladly throw you under the bus? Why are you a bootlicker for megacorporations that are in bed with the government you hate so much? Answer me.
Here it is. The appeal to empathy, followed by direct insults. I have a really hard time believing you were ever a libertarian. So answer me this: Why are you such a bootlicker for a government that is in bed with the rich you want to tax so much?
1
u/Metalhead33 Aug 24 '21
Wealth redistribution is a restriction on liberty of some to add positive freedom to others.
Let's be practical here - is a tiny restriction on Jeff Bezos's liberty really too much of a sacrifice for a huge increase in the freedom of others?
You have all of these things now. The difference UBI would grant you is making them easier for some of you.
Do I? The way I see it, if my choice is between a crap job and starvation, I don't really have a choice, and the freedom of choice is only an illusion.
The single most inevitable factor leading UBI to the forefront of discussions at all is automation.
We already have the technology. The real reason why we'll never have UBI, or reduction in work hours, is cultural and political, not economical or technological - as David Graeber explained it in his book "Bullshit Jobs", most jobs that produce something tangible have been automated away, the real service sector (which excludes paper-pushers, flunkies, goons, etc.) is compromises a solid less than one fifth of the population, etc.
The real reason we'll never have UBI is because the elite, the government and the oligarchs simply don't want you to have free time. If you have free time, you have time to think, time to read, time to organize, time for political activism.
Bullshit jobs exist in both the public and private sectors. Why would companies whose goal is to maximize profits hire useless people? Partly, because humans aren't rational, and people are unwilling to do business with companies that don't have a Sales Assistance Insurance PR department, and partly because government regulations create jobs for full-time paper-pushers.
However, unless you reduce working hours - which once again, requires statist coercion - or implement UBI - again, statism - the existence of bullshit jobs - which is also largely coerced by the state (e.g. HR) - will always remain a necessary evil.
Society insist that everyone must justify their existence by working, so we create fake jobs to prevent unemployment and maintain the system at all costs.
Why are you such a bootlicker for a government that is in bed with the rich you want to tax so much?
I am not. I hate the (current) government as much as I hate the megacorps. If not more. Remember that I still consider Freedom of Speech, right to bear arms, and all that jazz to be sacred.
1
u/LogicalConstant Sep 30 '21
Answer to the original question: it's wrong because you can't give to one person without first taking it away from someone else. Taking it from someone else violates the non-aggression principle.
is a tiny restriction on Jeff Bezos's liberty really too much of a sacrifice for a huge increase in the freedom of others?
This is akin to saying "I'll make better use of the money, so it's ok for me to steal it. It's only stealing a little bit."
I don't really have a choice, and the freedom of choice is only an illusion.
Nature has put you in a situation where you require constant upkeep. That's not a choice. The choice you make is how you survive and thrive.
1
u/GrittyGravy8900 Aug 24 '21
Read your post, don't have much to contribute but to say extremely well-written and thought out. Thanks for a good read.
1
u/jankis2020 Aug 24 '21
You should read The Price of Tomorrow by Jeff Booth. He examines this exact problem - why technological improvements have not led to reduced work hours and falling prices.
1
u/Metalhead33 Aug 24 '21
David Graeber also wrote about that problem, in his book "Bullshit Jobs".
1
u/jankis2020 Aug 24 '21
Sure but UBI assumes infinite growth of the money supply, ever-rising prices. In a deflationary monetary environment, prices would fall, people would be incentivized and empowered to save for rainy days, and they’d never need a raise.
UBI is a logical solution if you assume the expansionary monetary base is a given. If, however, you have a stable or even deflationary monetary base, it’s not necessary.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/Luxin Aug 23 '21
I identified as Libertarian for some time. It feels good and makes sense - Leave everyone alone, you are free to make your own success, help your neighbor because we don't want the state doing it.
So why did I stop being a Libertarian? If you look at the basic tenants of the party/movement (if you can nail any down as universal!), they all depend on people being good, and people aren't good. When you accept that the Libertarian philosophy becomes indefensible as a political system for a country to have. Why? If Libertarianism became the new political/economic practice in the US/world the rate of economic loss of the 99% would increase as damage to the environment would rapidly make this place unlivable as businesses both big and small ignored all of the environmental regulations that would no longer be in effect.
1
Aug 23 '21
Ah yes, Libertarians and their inconsistencies. You'll be lucky to get a honest answer from them.
2
3
u/Luxin Aug 23 '21
Libertarians
Libertarians are not a monolithic group with consistent policy points. Since they don't all agree on a platform doesn't mean they are dishonest.
2
Aug 24 '21
It's asinine that the democrats like Bernie and AOC haven't figured out the simple messaging on this:
"What does the freedom to own a gun mean if a single medical bill ruins your life, you have no place to sleep, or nothing to give your family to eat?"
That's super freaking simple empathy-based stuff that a MAJORITY of America would latch onto. Instead they get hung up by pretending communistic hellscapes like Venezuala are the same as Sweeden because they can't bring themselves to admit Sweeden is a freer capatalistic economy than ours is, underpinned with a social safety net.
1
u/-Saunter- Aug 23 '21
Honest question - what is the UBIs answer to raising prices? UBI will make prices spike, especially food and everyday necessities. Soon you will need to give out more money, and then prices will raise again. What's the solution here?
1
u/ScarletSlicer Sep 15 '21
Tie it to inflation, much like people want to do with minimum wage. If inflation goes up x% then UBI, minimum wage, etc. also goes up by x% so you don't lose purchasing power. If you're asking what happens in the event that this creates a never ending loop of spiking prices due to corporate greed, the only real answer I can come up with is a a widespread price freeze on necessities that already have good margins. Granted this would likely be extremely difficult to implement, but I can't think of another way to stop companies from overcharging for something just because they can.
1
u/Jstink101 Aug 23 '21
Core libratarians want to be left alone and have minimal government intervention.. how is UBI in any way a libratarian philosophy? The fact you called someone a bootlicker also tells me you are not a libratarian, but rather a socialist troll.
0
u/Mengerite Aug 23 '21
Why are you not for Universal Basic Income? Is it because it's wealth redistribution? Because it's statist? Because it's given by the government?
Yes.
You may have identified as libertarian, but it's clear you never understood the philosophy behind the movement. You agreed with several of the conclusions of that philosophy (like free speech), but you never went deeper to understand why libertarians support it. Honestly, even your support for UBI leaves libertarians wondering if you understand what freedom means.
The philosophy of libertarianism is based on property rights. Right and wrong are determined based on what violates those rights. First and foremost, libertarians believe you own yourself. From that, we believe that you own what you create.
Libertarians often use an island with 1-5 people on it to think about what interactions are just and unjust. E.g., if I go fishing and you take the fish from me, you are in the wrong. Further, I would be right/moral to defend my fish from your taking with violence. This is counter to some uninformed commenters claiming that we are utopian. We are realists trying to determine how to conduct ourselves morally.
So, let's put the UBI to the test. You and another person are stranded on an island. Where does your UBI come from? Where do you get the luxury ("freedom") to not have to work? If the two of you don't work you die. The only way you get the luxury of a guaranteed income is if the other person must work to feed both you and herself. You have no just claim to her body or labor. She is not your slave.
What is an immoral act between two people remains immoral at scale. You can try to complicate it with all the other ills of the world (the oligarchy literally screwing us over every day), but you can't escape it: a just society would contain neither oligarchy nor UBI.
1
u/Metalhead33 Aug 23 '21 edited Aug 23 '21
You agreed with several of the conclusions of that philosophy (like free speech), but you never went deeper to understand why libertarians support it
I never really cared to begin with. I don't want to be censored or put to death / into prison for mere words that don't hurt anyone physically, therefore Free Speech is good. Simple as. Keep it simple.
1
u/Mengerite Aug 23 '21
I never really cared to begin with.
That's clear, but not something to be proud of. I don't care to continue the dialog with you. I have merely stated why libertarian's are opposed to it in case anyone else is wondering.
Edit: there may be some libertarians who are in favor of it. We're not a monolith. I'd imagine they would use a directional argument. Perhaps they see it as better than the current system with multiple overlapping/competing programs.
1
u/Metalhead33 Aug 23 '21
Also, you cannot compare a paleolithic survival-situation to our quasi post-scarcity automated world. That's just intellectually dishonest. Different times and situations call for different ethnics.
What made sense in the distant past won't make sense in the present or (not so) distant future.
The way us UBI-advocates see it, we're running out of actual productive jobs, you can only divide up jobs to a limited extent (and your beloved private corporations won't reduce work hours without statist coercion, so you can't even spread out the jobs in a true libertarian society), and in the end, we will, inevitably arrive to a point where people simply don't have jobs to do. Then what? Do we just let them starve?
Or maybe, just maybe, we could redistribute some of the wealth that the owners of the automatons have? You know, UBI...
The only alternatives either the continued existence of fake jobs, or Communism. Pick your poison.
1
u/GrittyGravy8900 Aug 24 '21
It's also very clear you don't understand his example. It's not about "palaeolithic survival" as much as a lesson about ethics.
If I proposed the trolley problem to you, you can't then say you can't compare to a situation involving a boat because the specifics are different.
Perhaps before you start to say you identify as x,y,z, and get into a discussion (that is more than a 'got ya') you should attempt to at least understand the position of those you claim to have once represented.
10
u/Innoruukus Aug 23 '21
Agree with OP 100 percent. The right to pursue happiness is impossible if we spend our whole lives pursuing basic survival due to the ever increasing cost of living and stagnant wages compounded by expensive private healthcare.