The thought of giving money to prisoners brings up the discussion of crime 
itself.  Why would someone go to the trouble of stealing from others if 
anything they need can be obtained for virtually nothing?  Would the black 
market for drugs and other illegal substances that are banned from production 
by the robot army come at a very high price?

The entire concept of money becomes null in the distant future if nothing is 
rationed by it use.  I suppose we need to limit our thinking to the near future 
while there is a shortage of goods and services in order to make sense of the 
free money concept.

So, in the next decades to come, how do we establish a means to allow everyone 
to share in the great wealth of the country in a manner that smoothly changes 
with time?  We certainly do not need many more recessions or other setbacks to 
our economy caused by shocks generated by unwise changes.   I visualize an 
economic system as being unstable with time largely due to psychology of the 
citizens.  Fortunately the system has not gone too far out of reasonable bounds 
before some form of correction has taken place.  There is no guarantee that 
this state of affairs will continue into the future.

If change comes at too fast of a rate, all hell might break loose, especially 
if disruption to the distribution of food takes place.  Things would get really 
nasty in a hurry if the trucking industry were to come to a halt for some 
reason.  Some of the recent stories coming out of the war torn regions are 
heartbreaking.  It was sad hearing a young woman describing how grass tasted 
good after three days without food or good water.

I suppose that I tend to be a bit conservative these days when change leads to 
uncertainty.  I recall the idea that the devil you know might be better than 
the devil you might release upon us.  We may find out how true that thought is 
once the FED releases the interest rates in the not too distant future.  They 
have conducted a grand experiment over the last few years as money that was 
once being saved has found it way into the stock market and other investments 
seeking decent returns.   Something unexpected will surly crop up once the 
controls are lifted.

Dave

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Dec 15, 2014 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?



John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> wrote:


Give money to people in prison???


Why? They can't really spend it, unless they are then charged for their 
accommodation.



They would be charged. They would have to pay taxes if their income is high 
enough. People in prison often have sources of income.


I say, no means testing means no means testing.


Granted, Social Security, which is the only present non-means tested program, 
is not paid to people in prison. See:


http://www.ssa.gov/reentry/#a0=0






Instead it would just build up.



Well, they could give it away to charity or to their families. But if it built 
up, that would be okay. Someone would inherit it if they die in prison. If not, 
the government would get it back.
 
 

Heck, sounds like a saving scheme, just commit a crime to get into a white 
collar prison and when you get out you have a nice nest egg built up.



Why not? Do you think it would be better for society to have ex-prisoners 
starve, or wander around homeless? Remember we are talking about a world with 
unlimited robot-supplied material wealth. Ex-cons will not be taking away 
resources that other people might have because they will be enough for 
everyone. There will be no reason to be jealous of them or to restrict their 
access, any more than we would today restrict their access to the Internet or 
public libraries.
 
 

No, the money needs to be given to people who will pump it straight back into 
the economy, and people in need will spend it, prisoners aren't in need.



Actually those who do not pump it back into the economy will also help because 
that will reduce resource consumption somewhat. Even if material goods are very 
cheap they would still cost something, so people who do not consume them would 
be doing the rest of us a favor. A miser leaves wealth for others to use. A 
problem arises when everyone saves and no one spends.


- Jed



































Reply via email to