Basic income correlated to unemployment

Infect Teh Interwebs

If society doesn’t function, i.e. if society is oganized in a manner that is objectionable to a large part of its constituents, then society must change.

Problem is, society constantly evolves towards a political system that resists change and protects established interests – even if these interests are injust or out of bounds of reason. The sickeningly bipolar US electoral system is a nice example of a system gamed to resist this change. The vile European Union and it’s tarpit-like slugging apparatus does the same.

I have speculated on new democratic mechanisms to address these systemic wrongs.

Personally I like silver bullits; elegant soluitions.

Let me offer another one and let me ask anyone who reads this- if ‘society’ yielded no opportunity to work, i.e. near 99% unemployment, and a 1% would we take all effective wealth/gains, what would/should we do? That’s right, we should revolt and take it all. That’s what is the natural course for human populations – we kill tyrants. That’s how societies evolve. We progress towards a better world by resisting disparity and excludism and by getting rid of bastards to push other people under.

Right now there is clear and compelling argument that there simply is not enough work for everyone. All the simpletons, producerists and populists can demonize, scapegoat and bugbear the ‘underclasses’ and ‘lazy bums’ all they want, and I reply ‘go to hell’.

Society is unspeakably rich and some are just TOO rich. I say – share, now, or we’ll take it all. This isn’t communism – this is simple sanity. I don’t need to be rich – I’ll settle for basic human dignity. That means – a decent house, a chance to work, food, a chance for education, some energy for my decides, a few suitcases with simple clothes, some minor entertainment, many a book now and then. And some fair medical care.

But how much? I have always been in favour of a basic income, for everyone (the rich as well as me). That would be fair. Arguments for basic income are rock solid about now. It would also save billions on government interference and draconian wellfare rules. It would also return sanity to the workplace – give everyone a basic income, no questions asked, and let everyone work in addition, as much as they can. Give people with a degree of disability a little extra, but they can never.

For a norm for a basic income I’d establish a uncontrovertible standard and I propose to make it a global standard.

Of all gains in society, the state takes every year 1% per dot of unemployment and redistributes it as a basic income to all constituents as a society divident to all shareholders in that same society. Don’t like it? Then those with a stake reduce unemployment. Lower unemployment in such a system would lower next years basic income tax.

Still don’t like it? Move to Somalia. There are lower taxes there I hear. Simple, fair, elegant and impossible to denounce. 100% unemployment would take, all collective wealth (resources, food, power, whatever) gets redistributed to all as a basic income. It would give those left banned from taking part in society a chance to consume products, buy necessities and lead a dignified human life.

But you can of course not like this and wait for revolutions. If ever unemployment would become, say, 30% then it might get pretty nasty if we don’t do something. Those defending the current system might end up under a (proverbial?) Guillotine.