Universal Basic Enslavement

07/22/201863 Comments


As you may or may not know, depending on how much anarchist sci-fi literature you consume, "TANSTAAFL" is an acronym meaning "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch." But while TANSTAAFL may have been popularized by Robert Heinlein in his 1966 classic, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, at base it's just a reformulation of the age-old historical wisdom that nothing advertised as "free" is ever really free. As anyone ever suckered into a high-pressure timeshare pitch on the basis of a "free weekend getaway" offer will know, there is always a hidden cost to any "free" item.

So when one particular "free lunch" idea is being pimped by a rogue's gallery of tyrants and billionaires—from Nobel warmonger Barack Obama to rabid eugenicist Bill Gates to Facebook founder Mark Zucker-borg to serial scammer Elon Musk—you might want to ask yourself what the real cost of this manna from heaven is.

And which "free lunch" idea am I referring to, exactly? Why, universal basic income (UBI), of course.

Learn more about the UBI swindle and watch James' report on the post-flood clean up in western Japan in this week's subscriber newsletter. Not a member yet? For full access to the subscriber newsletter, and to support this website, please become a member.

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE.

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.

Existing Users Log In

Filed in: Newsletter
Tagged with:

Comments (63)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. I Shot Santa says:

    While the article itself was good, I’m surprised you had time to write it. Though I’m glad you didn’t go into detail on all the damage, the piles of ruined belongings on the side of the road, forming a gauntlet on your way to help, pretty much said it all; it was bad. Thanks for helping out your friends and friends of friends. After all, despite what many people say about anarchy being horrible people running around and decimating others and only living for themselves; anarchy is the community you just demonstrated. Thanks, JimBob

  2. zyxzevn says:

    I have a Basic Income. I don’t have to do anything for it. In the implementation I am not even allowed to do much. It is not the problem of the system paying me, but of the bad science behind it.

    Yet, it gives me time to do things that other people do not have time for:

    First, it is the reason why I am on this website. I have time to delve in the politics, and really look at all articles. The backgrounds and histories are much more worth than the quick news articles that the mainstream produce. But with a full job, I would not have time for it. Or even set my mind on it.

    Second, I am also working a lot on science. I started my own subreddits and wrote many articles. Many about the universe and the major problems with the mainstream theories http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmacosmology/wiki
    I am also working on a new computer programming system (/r/unseen_programming).

    Third, I am investigating and working with the paranormal. With my scientific basis, I want to look at all experiences with different approaches. (r/paradigmchange). The big breaktrhough came when the spiritual really did change things for me. And for other people. I help people to get rid of psychological and psychiatric problems. And more. I also help with the after-life problems, which does not all end well.

    Fourth, I feel that I have the opportunity to setup my life’s work. This goes a step further than 3. I want to educate people to do the same.

    So, basic income is not always bad. It totally depends on the implementation and the environment.

    I think it may help some people to wake up from the zombie mind of working every day. It may help people to find out what they really want.
    It may also help people to stay away from the dept-trap.

    I could also be working for the Police or local NSA and track criminals that download music. Or stop people from posting “bad” stuff on internet.
    I am glad I got my chance to wake up.

    • scpat says:


      I’m not going to bash on you, but I think you should think about a couple things. Where does the money come from? And where could that money have been spent if it weren’t spent on the UBI?

      All of the money the government gives away it first steals from someone else. It wasn’t produced by the government and then generously gifted. Therefore it is immoral, because stealing someone’s wealth is wrong, even for those who call themselves government.

      Secondly, the money that is stolen from those people is that much less of what they can now spend on something which would benefit them and take care of some need they had. It is also that much less money that could have been spent back into the economy and benefited someone else who was providing the good or service that the money was spent for. Therefore the redistribution of wealth by the government is not only immoral but also unproductive.

      • wall says:

        Um, scpat, it depends on who you are taking it from. Keep in mind that the system is already rigged in favor of the rich. Take a look at corporate privilege, and the financial system (which is really just a market place that sells bullshit…)


        “on #1: Globalism Is About “Free Markets”

        A common pro-globalism meme is the idea that globalization is not really centralization, but decentralization. This plays primarily to the economic side of global governance, which in my view is the most important because without economic centralization political centralization is not possible.

        Free markets according to Adam Smith, a pioneer of the philosophy, are supposed to provide open paths for anyone with superior ideas and ingenuity to pursue those ideas without interference from government or government aided institutions. What we have today under globalism are NOT free markets. Instead, globalism has supplied unfettered power to international corporations which cannot exist without government charter and government financial aid.

        The corporate model is completely counter to Adam Smith’s original premise of free market trade. Large corporations receive unfair legal protection under limited liability as well as outright legislative protection from civil consequences (Monsanto is a perfect example of this). They also receive immense taxpayer funded welfare through bailouts and other sources when they fail to manage their business responsibly. All this while small businesses and entrepreneurs are impeded at every turn by taxation and legal obstacles.

        In terms of international trade being “free trade,” this is not really the case either. Only massive corporations supported by governments are able to exploit the advantages of international manufacturing and labor sources in a way that ensures long term success. Meanwhile economic models that promote true decentralization and localism become impractical because real competition is never allowed. The world has not enjoyed free markets in at least a century. What we have today is something entirely different.”

        Also, consider why we are all in so much debt in the first place.


        It’s because the value of our potential has been stripped from us. We can’t even afford to be productive any longer. Wanna start a business? How you gonna get the money? Work ain’t gonna do it. You gotta go into debt. Wanna degree. Gotta have that debt. Even if you do go into that debt you’re probably gonna be screwed anyway, as many are discovering.

        So… I want to point out the idea of “wealth redistribution” as you conceive of it is a bit misleading. The wealth has already been redistributed to the top by a system that is designed from the ground up to make sure we get nothing for our efforts. That’s what capitalism is. You do the work, if you’re lucky enough to find any. And those rich fuckers get the capital.

        So, the base idea of universal basic income is not necessarily wrong, immoral, or even bad.

        It’s the way it will be implemented that will be bad.

        Take a look at the internet. Is it bad because it’s being used as a massive spy apparatus? I would say that the use of it is bad, but the system itself, the base idea of it is quite a good one that allows near instantaneous communication worldwide.

        You see, the evil fuckers at the top, they’re the real problem. They take all that could be used for good and twist it into something bad.

        Until we depose them, no options in any arena will be free of the efforts to pervert every last innovations humanity comes up with.

        And how do we depose them? We have to shatter their image in the minds of the public. The public will have to come to view them as the horrific, parasitical trash they are… as the weed that must be ripped out of the ground from the roots up. For that is what the upper echelons are. They are a disease that rots the world for their own vain benefit. And they will rot away our hopes, dreams, freedoms, potential and everything else until their are brought down to the level appropriate for their kind.

        It’s amazing when you think about it. This world is effectively a giant social toilet bowl where the stinkiest of the turds float to the top… and all the diamonds, platinum, gold, silver, copper, iron, and even the dirt sink to the bottom.

        The sooner their image is destroyed, the sooner we can drain this toilet… hopefully without washing away all the sunk to the bottom.

        A question: why did we allow as system to be produced in which our efforts are devalued for the sake of enriching the rich? This is our matrix. Why have we allowed the rich to twist it against us and in their favor? If we hadn’t allowed this, there would be no need for universal basic income. James pointed this out, but I thought I would crunch it down a bit.

        • wall says:

          So, yeah, UBI is just a solution to a problem that never should have been. And the focus should be on that instead of whether or not it is moral or right.

          If only I have realized that before I started typing all that.

        • scpat says:


          You make some points I agree with and also some that I disagree with. I agree with your ideas that we live in an unfair and rigged system. I agree that governments give corporations an unfair advantage. What I don’t agree with is how you connect those statements logically to your conclusions. You state:

          “Um, scpat, it depends on who you are taking it from. Keep in mind that the system is already rigged in favor of the rich.”

          – This statement of yours, and in the other paragraphs you write, basically lay out the argument that since governments exist, and allow major corporations loopholes and also an unfair advantage through other means (all of which I disagree with – such as licensing, laws, and restrictions that insulate the corporations and limit small entrepreneurs), that it is okay to steal from them. I disagree. Just because some corporations take advantage of an existing system does not make it right to commit violence against them. It is the system of government itself that is the real problem. It is the supposed “right” to commit violence against others that government is believed to have, that is wrong. That “right” is the basis for the creation of laws, regulations, and restrictions that big corporations take advantage of to weed out competition. In a free market (the absence of government) these problems could not exist, and all businesses would be forced to compete on a more level playing field to create the best product or offer the best service in order to stay in business.

          You state: “The wealth has already been redistributed to the top by a system that is designed from the ground up to make sure we get nothing for our efforts. That’s what capitalism is. You do the work, if you’re lucky enough to find any. And those rich fuckers get the capital.
          So, the base idea of universal basic income is not necessarily wrong, immoral, or even bad.
          It’s the way it will be implemented that will be bad.”

          – No, that is not what capitalism is. You voluntarily work for a capitalist in exchange for a wage, correct? You are not coerced into working for them. It is your choice to work for them. Both of you receive something of value based on your own standards. There is nothing unfair about that. Just because the capitalist makes more money than you do does not make it wrong. How do you think you would remain employed if the capitalist did not have a successful business that involved him making profits? So your argument that since capitalism seems unfair to you, that that somehow makes coercive wealth redistribution moral, is simply wrong and illogical. Violence against others breaks a principal. How exactly you implement that violence is irrelevant and does not make the scheme any more legitimate.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:


      Power to ya!

    • manbearpig says:

      I think you’re right that it will give people a lot more time to spend on the internet and offer people the opportunity to know what they really think and what’s really important to them…

      and much like the time I spend here on the Corbett Report is to a large extent my escape from the hard realities of the material world

      most folks, I imagine, if I am any indication, will choose to stay on the internet

      rather than change anything concretely in their “real” lives…

      They’ll “wake-up” and “hook-up” and never be heard from again…

      in the “real world”…

      the path of least resistance…

      UBI comes now that everyone’s found their favorite corner of the net.

      Universally freeing people from non-existant jobs by giving them a poverty-level allowance couldn’t have come before that or there’d have been a real life revolution.


    • mkey says:

      I’m assuming you’re on the receiving end of an unemployment cheque, which very much differs from UBI. It’s meant as a short term relief to be payed out from a shared insurance fund into which all receiving a pay cheque pay their share. Forcefully, of course.

      UBI is a monstrosity, a crowning achievement of subservience.

    • O.J. says:

      I’m in a very similiar situation as Zyxzevn – retired, so money comes in every month without lifting a finger. That allowed me to do a ton of research on many things (psychology and propaganda mainly) and then spend time to pull things together and share my findings with others. That is also what basic income allows, but it has many things to be taken into consideration before it would work for the benefit of the people, instead of those in power like the report points out.

      For BI to work, the money creation has to be in full control of the people.
      For that to happen, the people has to be in power – democracy.
      In this imaginary democratic country the people also have to want to have a social system that gives everyone a basic income, allowing them to freely choose how to spend their time – making more money would be one option.
      Capitalism wouldn’t work at all (well, it doesn’t work anyway) with the BI, but depending on the resources within the county, it mighty be possible for the state to produce enough income from natural resources to fund BI to all.

      In the current state of how things are in pretty much anywhere, this is mostly utopistic idea. Biggest problem being the total lack of democracy… but maybe us, freely thinking and free to choose how to spend our time without worrying about money people can come up with something that could work…

      … and then to sell it to the public past all the propaganda.

      Easy, eh?

      • mkey says:

        Retirement is not at all comparable to UBI.

        How do you propose gains can be made on natural resources when everyone is being issued free cash? In a healthy monetary system, a unit of currency represents working hours. Remove work from the equation and you have a problem.

        Redistribution of wealth does not work. Currency printing (or adding ones and zeros on a server somewhere) does not work. UBI can not work even in a 100% functioning democracy.

      • taxpayer says:

        ” it might be possible for the state to produce enough income from natural resources to fund BI to all.”

        Anybody here live in Alaska? A small part of that state’s natural resources revenue goes to [very nearly] everyone, equal amount per capita, the amount varies but is $1100 this year. It’s not a UBI, it’s because the state belongs to the people. You do need to live in Alaska, you don’t seem to need a bank account (but prisoners are excluded).

        If we start looking at ALL the natural resources of EVERY state, all of which legitimately belongs to the people, we come up with a pretty big number for value which has been privatized. Of course you could start by removing taxes and using this revenue to cover the legitimate costs (if any) of government.

        It’s not redistribution. It’s getting a fair distribution in the first place.

  3. scpat says:

    I only watched 5 mins of the World Economic Forum video but I was terrified and sickened by what they were saying. It’s hard to believe that these people (and most of the Youtube comment section) cannot understand basic economic concepts. It seems very possible that those WEF people know damn well that a UBI policy will only lead to people becoming more poor, but maybe that’s what they want anyway. Get the masses eating out of your hand and then pull that hand away when they haven’t served the State’s interests. This is nightmarish.

    • manbearpig says:

      Don’t worry scpat, people can just spend all their time playing games on internet, For FREE! You see? Everything’s just fine. or Virtually so…

      • HomeRemedySupply says:

        manbearpig says: Everything’s just fine. or Virtually so…

        Oh! Good. I can relax now.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      scpat, one of the reasons why I download my videos off youboob, instead of watching them there, is so that I won’t get sucked into their comment sections. I do this on all video sites now. It’s not just dis-info either; stupid people far outnumber intelligent people (who would have thunk it?) and there is virtually no chance to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there as a result. However, I do understand that, despite their present state of self-created stupidity, these idiots are still being exposed to information they have never considered before. Most will never proceed from the info they like, but those are the ones who choose to not matter. Their problem, not mine. But, with the increasingly mainstream use of the internet, more people ARE searching for more in depth analysis of subjects, rather than the superficial puff pieces the traditional propaganda outlets use. So, it’s a stupid mental brawl when you go into those sites, but they are also the spartan training grounds which will help to forge the minds of those who will eventually seek more. JimBob who ain’t saying they’ll find more, but the world works in some pretty freaky ways.

  4. manbearpig says:

    A very clear and coherent demonstration that will profoundly irritate many.

    India sure is a fascinating laboratory. From the late-60s UN experiment of Auroville (City of Dawn) the feel-good “spiritual” pseudo-non-money based international community, India with its dozens of smart cities at various stages of materialization and of course its brutal and largely ignored retraction some 18 months ago of 86% of its cash and the predictable consequences…bankrolling the most poverty-stricken after their comprehensive biometric fitting courtesy of some NGOs?

    Thought the following article from our friends at CNN was complementary:

    “Alleged breach of India’s biometric database could put 1.2bn users at risk

    …The database, known officially as Aadhaar, was launched in 2009 as a voluntary program intended to help prevent benefit fraud, it has since grown, and is now home to the collected data — including fingerprints and iris scans — of more than a billion Indians, or upwards of 90% of the entire population…

    …The newest government security measures, announced late Wednesday, will allow users to generate a randomly-generated virtual ID or token to avoid sharing their direct Aadhaar number for authentication, according to the government notice. A second security measure prevents secondary agencies from storing an individual’s Aadhaar number.
    Users are issued with a personal 12-digit identity number which they can then use to access welfare payments, and other government controlled services…

    Though implemented under the previous administration, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has championed the database, and pushed to make Aadhaar cards mandatory…

    …”Thanks to Aadhaar, for the first time in the history of India, there is now a readily available single target for cyber criminals as well as India’s external enemies … The loss to the economy and citizens in case of such an attack is bound to be incalculable,” said the report by the Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology….”


    With Patrick Wood’s words “What do you do when you’ve squeezed all the value out of money?” ringing in my ears I’d suggest,

    maybe the UBI won’t even have the time to be implemented as money itself will be made redundant, staple resources being directly allocated from a centralized continental control committee? (post (climate?)-disaster style).


  5. mkey says:

    Regarding bank accounts and how it’s abused in my failed state:

    According to local law, a worker may receive their pay in cash or via a bank transfer. The first method is being touted as something that is illicit (even if it’s in the freaking law) because it would surely lead to tax evasion, an argument which can not withstand any scrutiny since a paycheck is followed by some paperwork. If someone is looking at this paperwork, they’ll be able to see easily whether or not numbers line up.

    Contrary to what the law states, one of the finance ministers of the past, brought in a “rulebook” which says workers are to receive their paychecks over bank transfers only. Which enables any would be debtors to collect their debt more easily, bringing a person near bankruptcy at a push of the button.

    Now, I agree that debts should be honored, but there are many, many layers to this story. In this current setup, in which about 50% of one’s paycheck is diverted elsewhere, one can only be somewhat free if they do not have a bank account and no lawful income.

    • wall says:

      Really, debts should be honored? Why? The people who “lent” out the “money” (aka digits punched into a computer) never had that loot to begin with.

      All they had is (manufactured) government “permission” to get people to pay for digits in a ledger. All the while lowering the value of the people’s money by inflating the prices of things by making sure that pricing was based on the ability to go into debt instead of the ability to gain money. The whole financial system is a scam designed to devalue productive efforts for the sake of creating what we know of as the super rich.

      Another thing… take the student loan scam. You spend 18 years brainwashing kids into the idea that getting that bachelors will at least get them into the lower middle class. And then when they go out and get that degree they find that that was all a lie. A bachelors of science is a $20,000 a year gig. Shit, an art degree was supposed to pay $30,000 to $40,000 per year. An accounting degree is worthless as accounting is done in India. A programming degree will get you job working at Walmart unloading pallets and another job in tech support all thanks to outsourcing and H1B holders…

      So, the higher education system is certainly a scam. Should all these scammed degree holders “honor” this debt which was created out of nothing?

      Honoring debt is a sin. It only encourages the parasites to keep screwing us all. You should never encourage a scam by making it profitable. Encouraging scam artists (in this case bankers) should be a sin that gets anyone who commits it sent straight to hell when they die.

  6. I Shot Santa says:

    Not even really off-topic for once! After all, UBI is mentioned as an example in this video. But seriously, we’re all subjected to so much information we are basically stupified by it all. I actually use some of these techniques, though not in such a standardized method, as I’m sure all of us do. Anyway, I thought it was helpful enough to me personally to share. You’re welcome! JimBob who only knows that he don’t know jack.


    • scpat says:

      Nice video Jimbob, thanks for sharing. I’ve heard a way to break down the levels are:
      1. Learn by listening or reading
      2. Learn by doing
      3. Learn by teaching someone else

      • I Shot Santa says:

        No problem scpat, I’ve used those methods for most of my life as I’ve found them to be true. Especially the last two. While I like to listen and read (my eyes don’t like it as much as they used to though, plus I’ve fallen prey to that video affliction like everyone else!), they are still fairly passive unless you really take steps to ensure you’re questioning it. But they’ve been the foundation for all that I am today. Which may not constitute a rousing endorsement for them, since I’m not exactly setting the world on fire! 🙂 Way too lazy for that! JimBob who also doesn’t have a fire extinguisher either, but that’s okay; the second legally required exit from his efficiency apartment is the window right beside the door and behind the dresser. Gotta love the state mandated fire codes!

  7. VoiceOfArabi says:

    Hello James,

    You say…
    And which “free lunch” idea am I referring to, exactly? Why, universal basic income (UBI), of course.

    You have to be them, to understand them…

    Being Anderson Cooper

    I have just finished watching Late night with Colbert from 18 July (i receive the show late in my region), which had Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen promoting a new show for these two.

    So, As Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen walked to the stage, they received a standing ovation from the audience.

    Anderson Cooper, Andy Cohen and Stephen Colbert are all highly intelligent people. They are all well traveled, and they have been outside the USA propaganda bubble. They know the Truth, and they know they have to lie to the people as it is their job.

    I wondered at that moment. “What would it be like to be inside Anderson Coopers head right then.”

    I think it will be like this. Anderson Cooper thinking….

    I tell lies to these people, and treat them like stupid animals everyday, and the more i step on them the more they appropriate me and tell me how great I am. I am not like them.. they are nothing but lesser beasts. They don’t deserve to walk on two and should be on all fours.

    I will treat them even worse from now on, as they are not worthy of respect.

    Moral of the story. If you don’t stand up for yourself, the other side thinks lesser of you, and will double down on their mistreatment.

  8. mkey says:

    Scientists & Governments Have Modified Weather for 100 Years!

    Following the calamity over Japan from the past week and a really silly storm we had over here the past night I started looking at various weather modification sources. I personally never experienced anything similar to this storm regarding lightning strike incidence, it was really tearing it up. Later in the summer we used to get some pretty intense storms, since they would build up for the whole summer and when it finally hit it was usually something. But now we get these more frequent, occasionally violent storms. No floods, though.

    Anyway, I don’t think there is any practical doubt people can affect the weather, we just need to pinpoint the possibility of creating these apocalyptic events.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      Mkey, just look to GE for that one! Remember Kurt Vonnegut’s brother was on that little team that steered a hurricane into the coast. And let’s not forget that the stated reason for the chemtrails are to modify the weather. Strange how people won’t admit they exist even though they’ve admitted it already. I also found it strange how people who SHOULD know better than to confuse chemtrails with contrails (pilots, meteorologists, etc.) honestly are confused with them. Letting them know that super-condensed air will not stay in that form in such a dissipative environment only gets one a blank stare and a change in conversation. Usually by me as I tend to change it to “I’ve gotta do something”. JimBob who has a cut-off scale which needs to be reached before he’ll bother debating with a person.

      P.S. Just noticed my karma is now 98! Since my ascension is so nigh, I suppose ALL my conversations will be ended with a “I’ve gotta go” pretty soon!

        • I Shot Santa says:

          At about 5:20 they start talking about it:


          Apparently I’ve been a bad boy as I’m now back down to 91. It’s a sad day in the karma world, though I still find this karma thing absolutely hilarious! Especially once you understand just how much that definition has been changed by westerners who don’t have a clue about what they are talking about on it.

          • mkey says:

            I’ve seen that video by TSM, yes. The writing is on the wall.

            Karma swings both ways. You ought play nice lest you go below 90.

            • I Shot Santa says:

              Play nice? I’m sure we both know the reason for the sudden downturn; but I find it so funny that karma is being based upon how others think of me, rather than how my own thoughts determine my karma. JimBob who also finds it funny when authority figures asks what HE thinks of them, so don’t go using me as a guide to anything like that.

  9. Mishelle says:

    Someone else pays your livelihood? This ‘reciprocal’ relationship is based on what? What do you pay in return? I’m a ‘housewife’ these days, and I work pretty damn hard for that title. UBI reminds me of the great socialist propaganda piece “It’s a Beautiful Life”. Seduction 101!! You make great mistake in life, let others take advantage of you, but others pay for it, yippie, no problem, don’t feel too bad about it, feel great! Thanks to your big mistakes you feel no accountability, no reason to wake up to reality yet you will be paid anyway, again and again, it’s your ‘right’. Basic life privileges of food and housing are your right, just like a child. Given by whom? Your masters, who else? Those who think they will make contributions to society thanks to their new liberty to not have to make a living will soon realize they have no real work ethic, no real motivation, no base for ingenuity, b/c ‘necessity is the mother of invention’, sorry to be so cliché. One more chink in the slave’s velvet chaining. On the plus side, I welcome and invite it! All the quicker the delusions will wake the lazy, opportunistic, brilliant, entrepreneurial, and anarchistic. Bring it on!! I will to end of life send shame on those who wish to live off another by proxy, celebrating weakness and servitude until the bitter end–SHAME ON Y’ALL!!!

    • I Shot Santa says:

      I have no problem scamming the system we live in. But then again, I have always stated that I love to scam these systems. I’ve also noted that I do not consider societal norms when I do what I do as I left the reservation many years ago. Many people no longer have an alternative option; it’s the hand they’ve been dealt. Everyone justifies their own actions, but at the same time it seems he is taking steps to improve himself. Also, we don’t know what his income is from. If it is from unemployment, then he’s already paid in. As for myself, whenever I take from the system, I always think of how much the system has taken from me before. At 58, it’s possibly more than I’ve taken from it. I don’t agree with the assessments that BGI is good, as it’s a horrible idea and obviously mis-understood by those two who have the impression it is much like what they are currently receiving, but I say take, take, and take some more! You are not helping to change the system by supporting it. You CAN collapse the system by embracing it. Having said that, I can also understand your frustration as being a housewife is hard work. I am also my own housewife, learning early on that me and marriage was a bad combo, and I suck at it. JimBob who CAN make his apartment pass any inspection (except for the ones that are designed to have you fail. Mil. vets will know of those!), but chooses to give no spits for the effort.

    • Mishelle says:

      Sorry, meant ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ there, but the Italian film about the Holocaust I think translated as ‘It’s a Beautiful Life’ would work just as well. Sad part is I really liked both these propaganda films. Yikes.

    • wall says:

      Um, for one, a lot of these people who are getting a free ride aren’t really getting a free ride. They’re getting bread crumbs to shut them up and make them docile after being forced to give up their potential earning capacity for their sake of someone else’s greed.

      Is an impoverished person parasitical because some rich person decided that decent wages and pollution laws were just too expensive and decided that that job should go to some third world person that would work for nothing and would allow themselves to be poisoned through pollution? Or is the rich person the parasite because they destroy people’s lives for profit?

      Is an autistic person on welfare a parasite? They had their cognitive abilities stolen for the sake of profit. Who is the real parasite? (autism is the inability to form and maintain neural connections with a normal or greater level of proficiency. It is caused by heavy metals including through vaccination with aluminum being the biggest current worry, perhaps other forms of pollution, and an immune system that was over activated likely because they had a stronger immune system to begin with which would cause the effects of a vaccine to go overboard to the point of being destructive.). I have seen graphs before that show that people that are vaccinated are more likely to have a host of health issues from epilepsy to auto immune issues and asthma to other stuff I cannot recall. Most likely vaccines are just a way to make us more likely to be sick, all for the sake of increased profits. The same question applies to people dying of cancer for the sake of the MIC nuclear programs, and for the sake of profitable pollution in general… and so on and on for these types of issues.

      These examples paint the context for what I am about to say.

      One big issue I see with a lot of you is that you think that productivity is measured in increased personal wealth, when in fact it is the opposite. Getting rich is dependent upon a person’s capacity to engage in parasitic behavior. Welfare trash may be taking the dole check, but they ain’t the ones sending our jobs over seas… and they ain’t the ones paying people nothing for their labor while polluting the land, water, and air we all depend on.

      The rich are the true parasites, not the poor. And we need to start looking at the questions that people like Mischelle pose with that in mind.

      And the main reasons that the poor are not productive is because they are constantly taught they will get nothing for their efforts… and it should be kept in mind that the UBI will not make people lazy, it will be whether or not they get rewarded for not being lazy that will determine that. Reward should come in the form of greater wealth and enjoyment, not in the form of a lack of punishment for not working to make others rich. The latter is merely coercion.

      Another reason being that they don’t have the means to become productive. You can only spend so much on trying to be productive before you realize that you make more money by sitting on your ass and giving up… in many cases anyway.

      And we also need to view this in the context of how we are defining productivity. Do we really want everyone to be productive? Is putting up a factory that produces junk and pollutes the hell out of everything really more productive than just sitting on your ass?

      These things need to be addressed if you are going to say what an economy should and shouldn’t be like.

      Another thing I would like to point out, and I find it REALLY LMFAO funny… um, I would like to point out this very strange thing where people that word get ever so angry with the poor and those on welfare, but, LMFAO, they never seem to get angry with the billionaires, trillionaires, and bankers, and war mongers, and etc… that are essentially getting what I look upon as rich folks welfare. You know why rich folks are rich? Cus they got your dumb cunt ass to work hard to make them rich. LMFAO.

      I always love in when people proclaim that hard work is such a valuable thing. I mean, if those who have money got it from working hard, then why don’t I see Mexicans driving Ferrari’s and living in mansions?

      It’s always funny how people fail to notice that. The idea of hard work is itself a psyop to get you to feel pride in working hard to make the rich rich while you get little or nothing in return.

      • wall says:

        That should be “work” not “word” up there in the 3rd to last paragraph.

        Anyway, we need to concentrate on ways to make it to where people can get some reward for their efforts.

        And as to the idea that necessity is the mother of invention… not if you don’t have the resources to invent.

  10. HomeRemedySupply says:

    I am glad that James made the Flood Cleanup – Subscriber Only Video #078

  11. FlyingAxblade says:

    I don’t have a bank account. I see a lot. Keeping on eating the blue pills but the red pill still wins.

  12. finall says:

    I usually agree with you on a lot of things but you’re way off the mark here. UBI – done correctly – eliminates poverty. Look up the experiment in Brandon,Manitoba from a few decades ago (I don’t have a link but it’s out there.) Why eliminate poverty? Think about it. Also think about the fact that desperate (poor) people do desperate things. UBI allows people to meet basic necessities. They can plan things, they can further their education. Money, as we know, is made from thin air. So give people a little air and they’ll blossom.

    • Duck says:

      Eliminating poverty sounds great.. but take it from somne who lost people to ‘free money” being able to slob about and indulge yourself without needing to do things to survive is the same as sitting on the sofa and never excercing… reallly really bad for people physically and mentally.
      SOME people will blossom but the ,ajority will end up like those rats in that rat study by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun#Early_rat_studies
      People dont like the the need to work just like we dont like the need to excercise…sadly there will soon BE NO WORK for most people and it’ll end up like when we had no need to walk or carry stuff and get fat

      • s.jamieson says:

        Not all welfare bums are created equal. Some would use the money to improve their lives and others to devolve. I imagine myself as a self-activating person who would do much more work that I would choose rather than robotic work for little money, as economic necessity now urges.

        • I Shot Santa says:

          You are right that not everyone is like that; but take a trip on down to your local projects to see how it ends up overall. Try walking through that neighborhood at night. I recommend around mid-night during the last few days of the month. JimBob who hopes no one here is actually stupid enough to do that, as he has done so many times and knows you need to be pretty street wise for this to work. Work: as in survive.

    • weilunion says:

      No, under rentier capitalism it means that the means of production is owned by the elites. They will give us money to rent from them, our lives

      • I Shot Santa says:

        You say elites, I say creators. They created the wealth. Our system (in Amerika) has a pretty high turnover of wealth in generational terms. But when you say elites; you aren’t really talking about those producers of goods (I’m guessing). It sounds more like you are talking about political thugs. Which is not capitalism; it’s just thuggery.

    • wall says:

      Heh, that is one thing about invention. They may just invent a way to rob your ass because that’s all they can afford to do. LOL.

      I would like to point out that the premise that people like Duck there are arguing on is the premise that people need to be coerced into working. And that premise is why we have so many poor unmotivated people in the first place. Because they know they will get nothing for their efforts and will either suffer the punishment of working for nothing to make others wealthy or the punishment of just being poor. Either way they are screwed.

      Which leads to rather unsavory types of invention, such as ways to sell drugs like crocodil.

      We need a system of motivation that encourages people to do good work. Not lots of work. Just good work. Otherwise we will produce the planet into a wasteland.

      And “the projects” aren’t like that because of welfare. They are like that because those people have it in their heads, probably rightly so, that they will never get anything for their effort.

      They have also been preyed upon by the prison industry which uses pop culture to promote criminal behavior in order to drive up profits (there is a letter somewhere online about that)… not to mention the lead, fluoride and radioactive crap in their water supplies.

      When you see that sort of behavior know that there was a lot more that went into creating it than just welfare.

  13. weilunion says:

    The basic idea is enslavement. We are to rent sour lives from the owners of the means of production and thens be happy we rent!

  14. Ukdavec says:

    You are right to continue to identify the monetary system as being the core problem.


    Universal Basic Income


    Monetary reform being discussed in WSJ !


    • Ukdavec says:

      On the theme of monetary reform – these two papers from 2009 show there has been plenty of time for the replacement system to be designed and prepared.





    • I Shot Santa says:

      Ukdavec, speaking of monetary reform; not only does the CIA pub WSJ speak of it, so does the NSA propaganda Q-Anon. It keeps harping on the end the fed movement. However, we also know that doesn’t necessarily free our monetary system. If the Treasury Dept. were to take the reins of the monetary system; their cashless version would hardly be a victory for liberty. After all, all those crypto currencies incorporate a permanent record of who had it and what they spent it on. Though it would be relatively easy to bypass this, it would be a pain in the butt. JimBob whose own checkered past allows him to think of such methods on the fly.

      Yay! 32 Karma! This explains why I can see my fingers so well now. Thanks for down-voting!

  15. VoiceOfArabi says:


    Some of you will say… UBI will not come to my country as my leaders are smarter than that….. You will be surprised who control your leaders…

    To give you an idea… I suggest you google (or use any other search engine)

    Agent No Beef

    to give you a hint.. “No Beef” is the CIA code name for a countries leader…

  16. cush350 says:

    Like the houses you mentioned James, all we really have is our bones.

  17. hanky says:

    I watched that whole IQ squared debate. James, did you? The Universal basic income naysayers were also
    big gov. lefties, propounding welfare and pre-school for everyone as virtues. The anti-UBI guys were WORSE than the proponents for the UBI plan. That kind of surprised me; I had no one to root for. It was hard for me to enjoy the debate. Is IQ squared a democrat clustercluck?

    PS I re-iterated your points about pricking the filter bubbles at the free speech forum in Dallas last night. It was good. The topic was Trump-Russia, and the emotional ideologically possession was making a great showing. The fact that I didn’t try to ram my ‘knowledge’ down their throats, like all the other speakers, was well received.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      I didn’t watch that debate, but do you think it’s possible/probable that the anti-UBI people were worse on purpose? After all, with a “fair and balanced” debate under their belt, UBI sounds even better to the average idiot. JimBob who is prone to include an extremely large part of humanity under that idiot label.

      • hanky says:

        Who knows? They definitely did present a false dichotomy choice between two versions of big government paternalism. (The studio audience chose the anti-UBI side as winners, on the basis of which side changed the most minds from a pre, then after, poll).
        These were all big names, with high government and think tank credentials, two on each side. They were all very leftie, and proudly proclaimed their service for Obama, as well as their dismissal of Trump, etc… Not very persuasive to me.

  18. heartruth says:

    Interesting (quick) read, focusing on economic implications. Writer advocates for job guarantee scheme instead (still within the centralized govt. paradigm, but still, she’s touched on some of the economic factoids thrown about on UBI).

    “If the Silicon Valley suite love the idea, you can bet your socks it’s one that works against the interests of most people.”

    A Universal Basic Income is capitulation to capitalism, by Claire Connelly

    • mkey says:

      I realized that my brain is telling me something when I misread “capitulation to capitalism” as “capitulation of capitalism.” On second consideration the latter makes more sense to me, it makes sense UBI would destroy completely much of the jobs and with it services available today. People would have to choose weather to receive a pittance to “do nothing” or a bit more significant pittance to perform a demenial job which would of course act a minimum wage law which of course does not work.

      I’ll definitively look more into those psychological effects of work and especially how they define work.

      The “jobs guarantee” idea shows just how socialized in their thinking the author really is.

      • heartruth says:

        Good points regarding the author’s ‘leanings’ 🙂

        You’ve touched on an interesting point for me re: defining work and the psychological effects of work. This connection between work and identity and self-worth seems so tied up with the ‘Western’ (can’t think of a better noun at the moment) way of perceiving reality and mode of finding one’s place in that ‘reality’.

        Seems to me that ‘work’ (as defined generically in Western thinking) is just a poor substitute for creating an authentic sense of purpose and belonging – both within the ‘tribe’ (extrinsic) and in one’s personal relationship with all things Earthly and beyond (intrinsic). A construct born of the slave/owner, capitalist/laborer models of transaction. Totally artificial and intended as means of domination and control IMHO.

        So, I’m of two minds regarding ‘capitulation to/of capitalism’. If people are willing to exploit each other for personal gain, then it doesn’t matter which systems of exchange/transaction are in place – the grass still gets trampled either way.

        Maybe I’m getting too cynical!

        • mkey says:

          On one end of the spectrum work is gathering, hunting, basic survival and maintenance. On the other end of the spectrum you have timeshare jobs which contribute to nothing. These pointless jobs are a major cause of depression.

          • heartruth says:

            This by Caitlin Johnstone touches on the folly of relying on dinosaur ideologies, and how these inevitably ‘fail’ due to the (current) nature of human nature:

            “So in the cases of both true free market capitalism and true socialism, the problem isn’t necessarily that those systems don’t work (who knows, haven’t tried them yet), it’s that humanity hasn’t yet moved into a sufficiently wholesome relationship with power and narrative to be able to implement them. Complaining that your system hasn’t been implemented correctly is therefore actually just complaining that humanity has not yet experienced a global shift in consciousness.”

            Full article:

  19. alucientes says:

    Being against UBI without offering up a solution to the fact that 40% of the jobs that exist today will disappear in the coming decades does not solve the problem of how those people pay their bills and eat. Personally, I think capitalism should be completely scrapped and a post-scarcity model created bc otherwise, there is no moving forward, or ever even nearing our potential as a species. We have to free all humans from the basics of a decent standard of living. And we can. We have been producing a global surplus for the better part of the last century. Free from market forces, we could do so with our eyes closed.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top