• Aniki@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    eh, my personal take is that having a universal basic services is better than everybody just having a lot of money because the cost (to society) for a lot of things goes down dramatically when you’re using economies of scale - a well know example is public transport, which is much cheaper if you organize it for a whole society at once instead of each person buys their car themselves. another example is schools, etc.

    • vrek@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      True that lowers the amount of money required for “not having money”. The idea is that life sucks if you can’t afford a minimal level of comfort but once you get there your happiness doesn’t increase by having more money and potentially even goes down. Years ago that was about 70k per year (I think it was 2006 or 2007, would have to look up study), it was enough to cover all necessary stuff and some small luxuries. It’s nothing to do with the number 70k so if we can reduce the cost of it that’s great. It’s all about covering necessary stuff and a little extra. If that’s made you are about as happy as money can buy. To get more happy you need stuff that you can’t buy, see my other reply for examples.