User voted No.
2 votes
Aug 29, 2016

Let’s assume that it would only take 1% of the population to meet all the physical needs of the world, why should they GIVE anything to the other 99%? Which is what a basic income is doing, you’re taking from those who work and giving it to those who don’t. Would it not be better to take that human potential to do things? Look at the art, music, research, that we aren’t currently doing because people must make a living. There are plenty of worthwhile things that we aren’t currently doing because of the cost, so instead of a basic income, have people work at things they are passionate about. Love to garden, that’s your job, it wouldn’t matter how much or what you produced as long you were productive, same with art, music, research that would be your job, for which you’d be paid, with the goal of improving ourselves and the rest of humanity.

Reply to this opinion
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
Invite your friend via email:
Share it: