You are only browsing one thread in the discussion! All comments are available on the post page.

Return

FuckyWucky ,
@FuckyWucky@hexbear.net avatar

soo… not UBI

teft ,
@teft@startrek.website avatar

Seems to be unemployment insurance with extra steps and not backed by the government. Or a ponzi scheme.

centof OP , (edited )

Not really either, its a crowdfunded income equalizer. It is not based upon infinite growth so its not a ponzi scheme.

Edit:On second thought, it can act as unemployment insurance not backed by the government, but I would contend that is a good thing since the government programs often have an excessive amount of strings attached.

centof OP ,

Not sure why people are downvoting me. I guess I offended someone. Not sure how. ** shrugs **

bane_killgrind ,

I downvoted you because it's disingenuous to present "as guaranteed as a company can be" with "guaranteed"

There's no outside mechanism to protect the customers from this company. That's not guaranteed.

centof OP , (edited )

Of course there is an outside mechanism, it is

  • a. the government: if they lie about what they provide you can sue them like you can any other business that defrauds you.
  • b. you can always just stop letting them access your account if you don’t trust them.

Nothing is fully guaranteed. Society as we know it could easily collapse in our lifetime. Ultimately it will likely be a less conditional income than a job where you can be fired at any time for literally no reason. I see a guarantee as a promise essentially. It is only as trustworthy as the party guarantying it.

bane_killgrind ,

So you individually sue them after they fail to make good on their claims.

You should be able to see why this puts their customers in a compromising position

centof OP ,

So you individually sue them after they fail to make good on their claims.

Yes or as I stated earlier and is far more common, you can stop letting them have access to your financial account.

No, I really can’t see why that is a comprising position. This is how every business in the US operates. If a company defrauds you have to take it up with the company, (not likely to work if they are acting in bad faith), your financial instution or in a court individually or via a class action. How does this put you in any more of a compromising position than if you your internet stops working and continues to bill you for it?

The worst that could happen is you have to get your bank or credit card to stop paying them because they don’t live up to their end of the deal. While there is risk involved with giving companies access to withdraw from your bank account, there are also safeguards built into the system that can be used. All banks and credit card companies have ways to mitigate fraudulent billing. That is in addition to the option you always have of taking them to court.

bane_killgrind ,

The worst thing that can happen is paying into this, and not receiving a pay out when you get fired or get injured. Instead of having that money is a savings account, which would be the alternative that a service is not needed for.

This is strictly worse than having a savings account you contribute to.

centof OP ,

Your correct, technically it is a guaranteed basic income. The newsletter I heard about it from was one that promotes UBI so I got mixed up.

bane_killgrind ,

Technically it's not. If they go bankrupt somehow or defraud their customer base, there's very little recourse from the users.

centof OP ,

It is as guaranteed as a company can provide. IF they operate honestly, I see no reason they would go bankrupt. I would assume the users would have recourse via small claims court or possibly other courts if they fail to provide what they agree to provide.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines
    •