Summary of Potential Problems:
-The Deprivation of Maintenance of the Psychological Self and Civil Unrest:
I don’t know what @naxypoo 's background is but he’s actually touching on a very serious issue. In the clinical psychology field there is often reference to stripped identity. A door closes on a previously held opportunity(s) for self actualization (the reinforcement of identity in somewhat laymen’s terms). Might be summarized as the maintenance of the psychological ‘self’. These persons often suffer large periods of anxiety and depression. I’ve seen this first hand in my own wife when she left the medical community in which she was viewed in very high standing. Even today (3 years since) she speaks in the first person when mentioning her work. It’s evidence of the subconscious assertion of her identity being tied to her job title, and therefore her work, and therefore…WHO she is.
This is a primary to each living person.
This deprivation of ‘self’ on a large social scale, combined with a massive displacement of human capital would most likely result in massive movements of civil unrest, to which @spacebuzz has already referred. To take this a step farther however, I’m not sure it’ll just be civil unrest, especially given the nature of the human psyche that I refer to above. It might start as civil unrest in the more technological advanced parts of the country, but in the long run and if technology continues it’s march, I think there will be massive pockets of micro-civil war that will result in tech free zones. Those tech free zones will be the geographically representative areas that cling to a desire to maintain a functional relationship between human life and how it should be lived, or was lived. I’m not trying to get all apocalyptic here but my mind actually goes into vapor lock when I examine the idea that our current virtue system (the relationship between productivity, money, and psychological health) somehow manages to become no longer related.
Which leads me to…
-View of the Role and Origin of Money / Source of UBI:
@spacebuzz illustrates this quandary with his quote, “The problem is confusing work and pay…we call them retired.” While there might be the idea that money is somehow separated from the mode of it’s production, history says it’s been a fairly stable process for a very long time. And @spacebuzz, those retired folks produced their leisure in retirement by saving their life’s work in the form of…money. You cannot separate them.
Money has a specific virtue and value just as work has a specific virtue and value, and both entail each other. It is necessary that man negotiates with man, which means there needs to be a tool available that facilitates that peaceful negotiation of mutual needs. I loath using this phrase but I need to use it for context here; the ‘society of man’ (used to focus discussion on the historical relevance of society TO mankind) has dictated through time that money, whether it be in the form of goats and chickens or government guaranteed paper notes, is tied to an activity or trade that makes possible without violence, an exchange of goods and services. It is entailed that in order for those goods and/or services to actually be present, human output (work) preceded their appearance and availability. To my knowledge, the only movement of ‘monies’ that has taken place outside those parameters is either charitable in nature, or, is confined to small examples of work for work micro societies (such as American Indians) where physical money wasn’t required to make satisfaction. Keep in mind however, that trades of work for work are still preceded by the production of something of value.
And so…since the money for UBI must have an origin, the success of UBI will most likely rest upon the idea that a giant shoe horn can somehow separate the good and worthy intertwining of money and work. UBI will require the separation of the role of money FROM the reality that it must be produced. The fundamental problem, which I tried to mechanically explain above is that money, in all it’s forms, is the final store of value for human work and effort, which means, money is the direct representation of human production. Human activity, when portrayed as passive activity or leisurely activity, is not the same thing as human production.
I cannot be precise enough and I cannot string together a group of words that are powerful enough to convey the danger of this idea. Personally speaking I’m not sure I want to see those two incredibly serious and deeply inter-related issues separated, because I will be unfamiliar with the nature of man if it’s successful. ALL of you will be unfamiliar with the nature of man.
-View of the Role of UBI:
Obviously this isn’t settled. @spacbuzz has a view of it’s role, as does @naxypoo…and @Heyam 's view of human bliss. Someone even thought they could go on vacation. But the better question here is; who will decide? Ohhh but there are more sinister questions to be asked before we discuss the role of UBI. After all, one can’t properly discuss the role of UBI without consideration of it’s implementation. Implementation is…entailed.
All of you reading this and participating in this thread should have a small chill if you are properly examining this question. Who will decide the roll of UBI? Let’s drill it down a bit further; who will decide from whom or where this shall be taken? If it has to be produced…it has to come from somehwere…right? Who shall assume the power to do such a thing? If UBI is to be distributed to EVERYONE, then just exactly how much needs to be taken?
A fundamental necessity of UBI will be the power to take from those that are unwilling to give, which means, the man, board, or government committee, will need authority to execute the aim of UBI. Who decides what the limit of that authority is to be? What system of check and balance will the body of society hold over this board or committee, given the necessary nature of the power required to execute the plan? To what extent will that board or committee be empowered to act against a man or group that refuses to comply?
Example: UBI will have the power to collect from large corporations such as Apple. Apple refuses to comply. The UBI board seizes Apple property and charges the board members with felony crimes. Apple takes a giant hit in production. That’s what happens. And the result is that Apple can no longer ‘contribute’ the same amount as it did before.
Now expand the above river of cause and effect to every entity, corporate or otherwise doesn’t matter, that refuses to comply, and explain how the once giant pool that UBI draws from doesn’t become diminished in increments over time, and the once great idea of UBI starts to be assailed by those that benefit from it’s distribution…because UBI has to reduce it’s payouts…again…and again…and again.
More. Civil. Unrest.
What about the supposedly altruistic relationship between the society that receives UBI and the entity that grants it? What happens when that society demands more?
My own personal view is that the idea of UBI only remains sweet so long as it remains an untested idea. The law of unintended consequences here is so vast it’s hard to get it all on paper (properly). And to violate the idea that no man is entitled to the product of another mans life, on such a large scale, is the childish tampering with a kind of God mode. A mode that remains full of well meaning and bliss right up to the point where it’s implemented…and then it’s realized to be the most evil thing Man has ever done to Man.