Basic Income should be a basic right

Post Reply New Topic

How often were these Chiefs women? I would imagine not very often as physical intimidation probably played a part of the voting system which wouldn't really make it democratic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... an_leaders

Most of those are from the Modern Era so not really relevant.

Sure thing, the 16th and 17th centuries were so modern.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_history#Modern

That's not modern in the sense I mean and you know that. Modern as in modern thinking. Many of them were also early mid 20th century, and there were not many women in the US congress at that time, and still no woman President.

Not relevant to what we were talking about though was it. We were talking about primitive tribal societies which those women clearly were not part of.

How many female leaders were there in the advanced societies of Europe during that same time span (roughly 15th to mid 20th century)? 73 pages worth? I doubt it. Editted to add: figurehead monarchs don't count.

Last edited by RainbowUnion on 07 Mar 2018, 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

But we elect our leaders in secret ballots they cannot intimate us into voting for them. Pay attention you keep taking things out of context.

I've discussed this in another thread.

When the Roman Empire was conquering Celtic Britain, the leader of the Celtic resistance was Boudica. The Romans didn't take her seriously because she was a woman.

The Roman Empire was more technologically advanced than the Celtic world and yet they the Romans were more patriarchal.

Additionally, many of the oldest known artifacts on earth are mother goddess statues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurines

She was a queen though not democratically elected.

"Lots"?
Personally, I think most are...
Most people work to give their family a better lifestyle...
Human nature to look after your kids...
If you work at a job that gives you satisfaction, that is a bonus...

I worked all my life towards financial independence...
It's not the money...
It's the freedom wealth can provide...

Yeah I think the vast majority of people need both. I think the majority of Doctors want to help people but they also want to earn good money for instance.

Also, consider the aspect of "nest building"...
An important element of humanity for many, if not most, is finding a mate who can provide for their children...
Greater wealth usually equates to greater attraction...
This has been imbedded in human psychology from the genesis of the species...
This instinct simply manifests itself in different ways in modern times...

Once again, never forget:
All we think...
all we feel...
All we desire...
All we are...is a result of the evolutionary process...
I think a lot of people forget our roots...

Something else I didn't say earlier, but did say somewhere on Youtube (which just reminded me).

UBI would actually enable companies to pay their employees less. That sounds bad, but it means they could actually hire more workers. The labor market also would be more robust, people could just leave a job and go somewhere else (or at worst do nothing for a while) if their boss was bit of a psychopath or couldn't chain two sentences together, and I think that would keep wages from going completely through the floor.

The other good news - that might also mean a smoother transition into fully automated society, ie. higher continuous employment numbers as automation took over.

I also add the other benefit that I hadn't mentioned earlier, and this is a really, really important one - far few idiots who are there just because they want a paycheck. You'll still have them, there's lots of entitlement mentality out there, just that sitting around with their thumb up their arse doing nothing really will be a viable option and, just my honest opinion, I'd almost rather pay people like that $12k a year to live in a trailer than have to redo their work, get them to do their work if I'm charged with that (think of the babysitter with no authority roles like accounts payable and receivable where you're rated on how much you can make purchasing or sales jump), or worse still - having a boss that reminds you of Hunter Thompson in Fear and Loathing or whose so confused that you get more trouble for doing things right than doing them wrong. It would mean much more meaningful things getting done and less Hunger Games political BS as the idiots right now quite often do all they know how to which is convolute things so that no one else can understand their job. That means just the gains in efficiency alone as the idiots leave would probably pay their $12,000 a year if not better.

The alternative of not having UBI, aside from the risk of revolution, is probably also the risk of either having permanent contracting with no hope of employment, and living with your parents till they die (then selling their house hoping it will be enough to pay your appartment bills), that's if you can even get such a job, and on top of that if there's drug testing at any sort of known intervals you'd have to constantly watch your food, watch your drink, because it's quite possible that you would have coworkers who'd spike your coffee with opium or something like that to get your spot.