[stuart73547373]

this would be great if everyone was rich enough to afford to pay for their services with money.

but it would cut off a lot of services and opportunities for everyone else who is able to pay with their attention (to ads) instead

[secstate]

I mean, we're basically heading towards a basic minimum income at that point, where you truncate the top 5% of the tax ladder and redistribute it to the bottom 25%. At that point, people could pay for services.

Dig a little into the idea that people can "pay" with their attention (and with their poor health, crappy buying decisions, personal freedoms) might fit the dictionary definition of sinister.

[chii]

> truncate the top 5% of the tax ladder and redistribute it to the bottom 25%. At that point, people could pay for services.

why should those at the top 5% pay for more than basic subsistence to the 25% at the bottom? Welfare is for survival (and survival only), not for services that is not essential.

[n4r9]

Yeah, the trade-off of switching money for attention is not obviously beneficial to society. For example I can easily imagine that there's a significant mental health impact of being constantly advertised newer and better things.