IMHO one of the non-financial reasons to do UBI in the first place is this - so that people have the time and space to think further ahead than just doing a crap job. So they can see how good they are at the piano, or train to be in the olympics, or whatever.Firebot wrote: ↑ What does grants have to do with UBI? I am all for grants and promoting artists who may need a boost in education or a project or programs and getting that extra help. A grant application is also heavy in paperwork and gets audited and scrutinized throughout your project. Most people who apply do not get grants, and it also only applies to select artists (2103 artists is nothing, if everyone could get free money and accepted they would).
https://canadacouncil.ca/funding/grants ... ve-a-grant
Are grants seriously the example you are trying to use to argue? UBI is none of that. You just get free money, no questions asked. If you make less then 34000 reported on income tax, you get free money. Don't get stuck on the fact that the example used is an artist to make a fallacious argument. Could have use a Twitch streaming video gamer or anything else. It doesn't matter what you do, you just get free money.
Let the pianist apply for the grant and be evaluated.
At the moment, a combination of ignorance and cost of living keeps people locked in crappy jobs because if they were to give it up, they'd be homeless.
So you work in retail for 40 years, never having 'a chance' to discover what you are really capable of.
For sure - many people will do little to nothing. Robots will take many of those jobs because the cost of employing a person is too high (because nobody will work for $15 an hour when they have 'enough' already from UBI). But the potential is we end up with a better society, more people following their dreams, rather than being stuck in a 9-5 (or worse).
Work is good is such an old fashioned idea, and it made sense *until now* in that there was a need for humans to work growing food. Now we're past that. We don't need miners, or farmhands; we don't even need secretaries, typists, etc, etc. But we are still *even more productive* than we were when we *did* need those people.
So why not spread the wealth? Companies want consumers to make the economic cycle work. Let those driven by an occupation, or money, be driven. Let those that aren't, do what they want, and cut out the 'suffering' of spending 40 hours a week doing drudgery.