(no title)
throaway955 | 7 months ago
Hence the UBI.
>In theory yes, in reality no. One will exacerbates the other.
Big big big assumption that doesn't match my reality very well. People who keep active, have a social life and are happy are at less risk for addiction. Not people who "have a job." Those are not the same things.
>You asked me whether I thought it was better and I gave you two reasons why I believed it was better. I believe it is be a completely honest assessment based on my own experiences. If you have a critique that is objective of my position I am willing to listen to it, but moralising about how my assessment I am not interested in.
It is not "better" for people to go to work day in and day out as a way of paying back society while slowly killing themselves with addiction. The better thing is to treat the addiction, not get them working.
ReaperCub|7 months ago
Which requires someone else to work to pay for those things. I don't believe other people should pay my mortgage and bills. Those are my responsibility.
I chose to buy a house. I chose to buy a car. I chose the 1 gigabyte virgin media broadband package. Nobody forced me to choose them. Therefore it would be irresponsible and immoral to expect someone else to pay the bill.
> The better thing is to treat the addiction
This assumes that addiction is a disease and a not a choice. I firmly believe it is a choice. I choose to drink excessively in the first place. I made the choice to stop drinking. I chose to stay sober.
As for the rest of what you wrote. You really need to go back an re-read what I said. You asked me which is better between two scenarios. I stated that one was better than the other with a rationale.
You seem to be arguing something else entirely now. I am not sure really what you are arguing against. Certainly not statements I've made in this thread.
throaway955|7 months ago
Then you've made the choice to not pursue other things that will make you happier than "working." Yet my point initially was that working is not anywhere close to the only way that people can stay active and away from "rotting."
No one is saying a UBI needs to pay for a 3 story house and 1 GB internet. If you want more than the basics, you know what to do...work!
>This assumes that addiction is a disease and a not a choice.
No, this assumes that many people will need help quitting an addiction.
>You asked me which is better between two scenarios.
Both scenarios are grim and best avoided. The better solution is to help solve the problem, not to act like work is a cure-all, or that a marginal improvement in the form of societal contribution (or "max time away from drink") is sufficient. For many people, work is the reason they drink, or do drugs, or have anger issues. A proper UBI helps people maintain a healthy lifestyle without having to put themselves in a position where they are stressed and powerless for the rest of their working life.