Universal Basic Income

[wufwugy]

I just spent some time in the real world and got clued in.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is perhaps the most significant difference between the left and the right (on the spectrum of the left being authoritarian/social justice vs. the right being libertarian/classical liberal/conservative).

Per usual, skin in the game.

[CoccoBill]

Per usual, skin in the game.

Do you mean that by having skin in the game people tend towards ideologies/policies that they perceive to benefit themselves?

[wufwugy]

Do you mean that by having skin in the game people tend towards ideologies/policies that they perceive to benefit themselves?

I hope we can discard the fiction that the left cares about people and the right cares about themselves. The opposite is closer to the truth.

[spoonitnow]

I hope we can discard the fiction that the left cares about people and the right cares about themselves. The opposite is closer to the truth.

Bingo.

I know. You taught me that.

You should really consider learning when to say "no homo."

[wufwugy]

oh i see it. yeah that is a no homo moment

im not a "no homo" guy. seems to be too much of a bro thing for me.

[spoonitnow]

oh i see it. yeah that is a no homo moment

im not a "no homo" guy. seems to be too much of a bro thing for me.

[wufwugy]

i didnt wanna lol but i did actually lol

yes homo

[CoccoBill]

I hope we can discard the fiction that the left cares about people and the right cares about themselves. The opposite is closer to the truth.

What do you mean by it then? And how is the opposite more true? Leftist views here are most prominent among educated high income people in cities. Right-wing and centrist views are most prominent in rural areas among poorly educated working class. Is it different in the US?

[wufwugy]

What do you mean by it then? And how is the opposite more true? Leftist views here are most prominent among educated high income people in cities. Right-wing and centrist views are most prominent in rural areas among poorly educated working class. Is it different in the US?

It might be different in the US if in places like Scandinavia, the general population are big proponents of authoritarianism and social justice. I'm not sure that's true though.

In the US, those who are big proponents of authoritarianism and social justice tend to be people who don't bear a more full weight of their actions and who tend towards ignorance of and insulation/isolation from the real world.

[CoccoBill]

It might be different in the US if in places like Scandinavia, the general population are big proponents of authoritarianism and social justice. I'm not sure that's true though.

How did you draw that conclusion? My personal opinion is that those who are better off are able to behave altruistically and not just struggle to make ends meet. Hence, you're poor you vote for anyone that you perceive could make your family's life easier. You're well off and doing fine, why not try to help others too, at least to soothe your conscience and to be able to say that's how you roll.

In the US, those who are big proponents of authoritarianism and social justice tend to be people who don't bear a more full weight of their actions and who tend towards ignorance of and insulation/isolation from the real world.

So what you mean is that lazy and poor people support leftist views since they don't have skin in the game? Wouldn't they be the beneficiaries of social welfare policies, aren't you leaving out half of Taleb's definition of SITG, which is as much incentives and disincentives?

FWIW, our previous parliament elections had the following results:

Keskusta (centrist, mainly rural folks vote for them) 21.1%
Kokoomus (right wing) 18.2%
Perussuomalaiset (some fucked up nationalist socialist mixed with right wing rhetoric) 17.7%
SDP (social democratic party) 16.5%
Vihreät (the green party) 8.5%
Vasemmisto (left wing) 7.1%
RKP (the swedish party, yeah ikr) 4.9%
Kristilliset (christian democratic party, zealots) 3.5%
Piraattipuolue (the pirate party, lol) 0.8%

If we look at just the capital city, things are quite different, here's top3:

Kokoomus 26%
Vihreät 18.8%
SDP 15.5%

So, from what I understand, not too surprising that the right wing, eco-hippies and social democrats dominate the major cities, the overall winner pigfarmer-Keskusta was 7th among city folk.

[BananaStand]

How did you draw that conclusion? My personal opinion is that those who are better off are able to behave altruistically and not just struggle to make ends meet. Hence, you're poor you vote for anyone that you perceive could make your family's life easier. You're well off and doing fine, why not try to help others too, at least to soothe your conscience and to be able to say that's how you roll.

almost no one thinks 'altruistically' like that. Even people who probably do have enough, and aren't struggling to make ends meet, still feel like they should have more. And they usually have a point.

[BananaStand]

the right wing, eco-hippies and social democrats

Isn't that everyone??

[wufwugy]

How did you draw that conclusion? My personal opinion is that those who are better off are able to behave altruistically and not just struggle to make ends meet. Hence, you're poor you vote for anyone that you perceive could make your family's life easier. You're well off and doing fine, why not try to help others too, at least to soothe your conscience and to be able to say that's how you roll.So what you mean is that lazy and poor people support leftist views since they don't have skin in the game? Wouldn't they be the beneficiaries of social welfare policies, aren't you leaving out half of Taleb's definition of SITG, which is as much incentives and disincentives?

I think this is confusing what the SITG is for. An example is how Marxists do not have SITG regarding Marxism but they do have SITG regarding things that emerge from their lack of SITG of their Marxism beliefs. A Marxist might have incentive to argue in favor of Marxism because it might benefit him in the eyes of his peers. But that's not SITG of the Marxist beliefs; it's instead SITG for his interaction with his peers. SITG for Marxism would be if the Marxist lived in a Marxist society.