or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Jekyll

Well, I think the point is that we're already subsidizing a huge part of our population, and ending the welfare state will never be politically feasible in the foreseeable future. Minimum income allows us to do what we're already but gets rid of the huge bureaucracy and waste associated with our current tangle of programs. It also allows poor people more self-determination which may allow some of them to actually become legit members of society.
I think happiness with one's job is often directly related to one's level of ownership, i.e., even if you're a janitor, if you have the freedom to do your job as you see fit (within clear, well-defined boundaries) and feel as if you are personally essential to the cleanliness and maintenance of your building, you'll be a lot happier and often even innovative, even if it is only within that small, "menial" context. Job satisfaction (and performance) most suffers when people...
I've seen this idea put forth in various forms by all kinds of people over the years. It always seems like a pretty good idea on an intuitive level. Our current welfare system is obviously a hideous mess, and off the top of my head all the potential problems with guaranteed minimum seem to be less destructive and wasteful than what we've got now.I'm hoping someone who actually knows about this shit will weigh in.
What good is money then?
Meanwhile on the other side of the state...http://www.mackinac.org/17372
I don't think so. In fact, I think this is a terrible way to frame the issue. Permitting or even encouraging non-marital sex does not necessarily lead to "baby daddys".
that was directed better than almost any tv episode i've seen of any show. felt like the best domestic violence horror movie never made.
I didn't notice who I was replying to till after I posted.
Really don't see why this is automatically a problem? Some cultures are inferior to others, no?
New Posts  All Forums: