H LV <[email protected]> wrote:
> A similar judgement can be made about slavery: it is bad for the economy > because it is inefficient. > Yes. That was true even in the 19th century, which is one the reasons the U.S. north was wealthier than the south. Coerced labor is inherently inefficient. Nowadays, even enthusiastic slave labor could not compete. For example, even when people volunteer and work enthusiastically for free, they cannot bake goods as cheaply as machinery can. > However, the rich do not want to be viewed as selfish, so > paid work must be portrayed as morally superior to any other > notion > of work. > > Let us be careful not to generalize about rich people. There are all kinds. There are Democratic ones in Republican ones, although they do tend to gravitate to the Republican Party. What I hope is that most rich people will be pragmatic. Even the amoral ones mainly want more money. They do not care what happens to other people, but they don't wish them harm. I hope that we can convince the wealthy class that a guaranteed income will increase overall wealth and give them more business opportunities. In that case they will support it. People can change their minds quickly about social policy. I was surprised to see how quickly support for same-sex marriage spread through the U.S. Here in Georgia, some conservatives are still fighting it, but it has support from corporations such as Coca-Cola that do not want to rock the boat. Mainly, they want to sell soft drinks to gay people, I assume. I can well imagine that Coca-Cola would be thrilled to see a moderate guaranteed income, given the mass market they serve. Frankly, I do not see why you would care that other people are getting a guaranteed income as long as you yourself are doing well. Money is not a zero-sum resource. Why should anyone care whether other people work as long as you get the goods and services you want? Back when we needed people to do all jobs it made sense to get angry at people who shirked. When I go to the Post Office and see people loafing around not working, it upsets me because I am standing in line, and because I want them to deliver my mail quickly. When I send an email, machines do all the work. There are no human workers involved. No one shirks. Suppose I go to a hardware store to buy a gadget. The employees are standing around talking instead of helping me. That bothers me. So I go to Amazon.com and buy the gadget instead. I eliminate human interaction. Yeah, that's cold. It is unfeeling. It reduces overall employment. But I just want the gadget. I am not there to make a social statement. (Actually, the people at Lowe's are friendly & helpful. But the other day they did not have a plastic toilet paper rod of the right size, so I got it on Amazon instead. Question: why are there two different standards for toilet paper rods?!) - Jed
