divVerent
@divVerent@social.vivaldi.net
Software engineer. Mathematics major. All programming languages are bad. In free time, game developer; main titles: #AAAAXY, #Xonotic, #Nexuiz. Super Mario Maker troll fan (i.e. I enjoy watching streamers suffer). Primary: @divVerent
social.vivaldi.net
Replying to
@cy@fedicy.us.to
@cy The problem is, when the government prints money, it simply reduces value of all existing money in circulation. Which primarily affects normal people, as billionaires tend to hoard their value in stocks or real estate, safe from inflation. So any approach based on printing money just flattens the 99%, making them all equally poor, while taking nothing from the 1% (but very likely even redistributing more to them). So I kinda fear that an UBI approach will feed the poorest, which is good but will also make the "20% to 99%" poorer (worst case, the entire 99% will be living from paycheck to paycheck, always on the brink to starvation, and will not be able to afford luxury items like an internet connection), while doing nothing at all about the hoarding 1%.
I honestly do not see how your idea of solving the food problem should work. So you want the government to decide who can eat how much and what? That sounds like Soviet style planned economy and we all know how well that worked out. Holodomor?
The problems I mentioned of course do not happen in small scale pilots yet, so these pilots sadly do not tell the full story.