I love this idea. I find it amusing, however, that one of the most common objections to this idea is how it will be funded. To which I say, if billions can be spent on wars, a few priorities are available for adjustment.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I find it amusing that people think that getting money for nothing is a good idea.
Nothing? What exactly do you consider "nothing"?
Even the genuinely laziest members of society still participate in the economy. Even the poorest members of society still participate in the economy. Even the most vulnerable members of society still participate in the economy. Even the most spoiled of bratty children still participate in the economy. Why? Because just about everything costs money, meaning just about everyone needs to spend money on something...
An eight year old gets that new gadget for which they've been begging their parents.. money goes into the economy. That's an eight year old... they didn't earn that money... or did they? Chores were a potential part of the agreement.... Learning about making agreements perhaps (preparation for living in society)... Or perhaps they got it purely for begging until the parents could take it no longer. That's a pretty concerted effort... might have taken some manipulative skills (again, preparation for living in society). Of course, this is all disregarding the possibility that the kid may have mowed a neighbours lawn for that money. Sure, it's not curing cancer... or repairing crumbling bridges... but it's certainly not nothing.
Every month, a female menstruates... $$$$$$ goes into the economy.... this starts when they're a tween and goes on for decades... hygiene products, extra showers, pain relief.... bleeding more than blood here... #NoTaxOnTampons :P The mere existence of menstruating females keeps a lot of people in jobs. Sure, it's not some sort of effort for sociological reform, but I think tampon companies would agree that it's not nothing.
Hungry? Don't know a farmer? Don't know how to grow your own food?... money goes into the economy. A lot of it. Regularly. Babies don't do much, relatively, but they gotta eat, right? Actually, let's consider babies for a moment...
I could guess all day long at what you mean by nothing and be wrong, but I would imagine you'd consider that babies are pretty much doing nothing (but by all means, correct me if I'm wrong on that). Yet the amount of money that goes into the economy simply because a baby is about to come into existence can amount to quite a lot. Then there's the birth, which isn't cheap... followed by the diaper years, which also aren't cheap. This baby is just figuring out the absolute basics, yet money is just flowing into the economy because of them.
And they might actually grow up to cure cancer, repair crumbling bridges, or make some sort of effort for sociological reform... especially if they have a smart parent that saves their kid's monthly $1000 in an interest bearing account until the kid is informed enough to make decisions about it.
Oh, can't forget about water. Water is necessary to live, and that costs money too. And not everyone in the country is even getting the clean water for which they paid.
Considering that nearly all basic necessities need to be purchased... and most states charge sales taxes (and a variety of other fees from state to state)... and making purchases keeps the economy going... and taxes should keep the infrastructure going... wouldn't the sheer act of purchasing anything within the country be contributing in some way?
Sorry, seems I went on a bit of a rant when I was aiming to inquire as to what you meant by "nothing"... I'll circle back there now... What exactly do you mean by "nothing"?
Natural resources like oil in the Alaska case.