Ethics applied to Economics

Hi, Kris

When I said “the literature below” I meant: the titles listed below in the Signature. …the references 'for your reading enjoyment.

For example, see the 2nd and 4th paragraphs on p. 18 of LIVING WELL.
The discussion there is on Ethical Technologies.

I don’t get signatures on this little phone it is set for on in the settings but, apparently this phone or program for phone won’t allow it or I am utterly ignorant of this thing, that last is the most probable.

Readers may find to be of interest the article found when you Google:
medium - introducing the UBI Center

There a brief history of the Universal Basic Income concept is presented, and news of a data-driven open-source site designed to test various UBI plans.

Also see this link in Wikipedia on the topic: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
or this link - more-specifically on UBI:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubi

Or, you may prefer this clearly-written account of how the UBI has been implemented around the world, and the success it has had:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_inc … _the_world

UBI has only been implemented on a trial basis in a couple of countries and there are no clear public reports as to how the ventures fared.

Sounds like another chapter in the How to Destroy a Nation manual. The first chapter is on eliminating occupation (jobs), the easiest way to destroy a nation.

Free healthcare, free food, free education, free housing, and now free money as well. Why not. Of course like gold and jewelry, if everyone has it, it is worthless.

People rush in. Jobs rush out. Nation goes bankrupt. Poverty explodes. Socialists bathe in domination.

I suspect that UBO, Universal Basic Occupation, would be a better tactic. Give a job to everyone. It shouldn’t take a genius to figure out where that leads. Just ask Stalin.

Papa Stalin did the best he could, pal. You ever been to Russia? It’s a big ass frozen field with like three factories. It’d take at least a hunerd years to get that place up and running.

If you took that same revolution and made it happen now, instead, the chances of success would be astronomically higher.

Perhaps you could relay that to Mr Putin.

Don’t you worry about me and Putin. We talk politics all the time when we aren’t wrestling bears and riding four wheelers.

The fruit of a decadent society. You need more globalism.

obsrvr wrote

I agree.

Looked at these, then looked at the amount of people that the government knows about in the USA, then looked at National debt and how much it would take from each of us to pay this debt off.
Strike one in my opinion for UBI.
Humans are corruptible. Humans take advantage of free things, they lie, cheat and connive. Look at the abuses in food stamps and welfare
Strike 2
Our government is f***ed up right now. We have crappy con artists in Congress and Senate in both parties. Both parties think that they should be the only political parties.
Strike 3

I can’t get behind UBI for those reasons and probably others that I have not yet thought of. Sorry my friend.

That is why some economists rationally argue that the national debt should not totally ever be paid down. it is partly owed to Americans: to those who have purchased government debt instruments [T-notes, T-bills] as a security measure.

In the initial post of this thread, I wrote: “Do we need now to put into effect the UBI - which stands for “Universal Basic Income.” Or some well-thought out form of it

On the web I found this analysis of what is called “The Freedom Dividend.” It is a proposal for a well-thought-out form of UBI. The analysis explains how the plan would be funded, how much it would cost, what would result from it, and other practical implications.

Here is a safe-to-open link to it: yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/

:arrow_right:Then see these details as to how exactly it would be paid for – without adding to thee national debt: freedom-dividend.com/

A critical review of the proposal is found here: taxfoundation.org/andrew-yang-v … ic-income/ Unfortunately the model used to calculate the costs makes some unwarranted assumptions, such as that there will, as a result, be a decrease in economic activity.
Actually, the opposite is likely to occur - due to technological innovation encouraged by the plan. The recent winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics demonstrated research that showed that people who receive a grant do not do not cease working; the labor force does not shrink. The evidence bears this out.

Some objective facts about UBI plans are available at this site: medium.com/ubicenter/introducin … a8011bfc39

Does anyone else have a view on this topic? Let’s hear it!
Or, would the resulting economic growth make it all worth-while? What are your opinions on the subject?

l.

.

Found an interesting discussion here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=194787&p=2724243&hilit43

Can anyone update us on some positive developments made in the last five years in progress in the direction of a needs-based economy?

If you know of any, please respond.

I’d like to hear from you!

ETHICS AND ECONOMICS

Is everyone who may be interested in the topics of Ethics, democracy, and economics aware of this fascinating site informing us about the concept of Democracy in the workplace, rather than the more-common hierarchical structure?
Check out this link: institute.coop/publications

What do you think about the fact that these cooperatives actually exist and are practical functioning entities?

When Ethics is applied to Economics we learn that there are alternative ways of organizing a business - within the capitalist system - where workers have a say in the setting of their pension size, their pay, the projects they want to work on; etc How about that:!: :exclamation: :sunglasses:

As a result of some research here for you is another link about the cooperative movement existing within the current private enterprise system:

cooperative.com/programs-se … es/default.

It seems to be the case that democracy in the workplace is possible, and actual in existing large-size organizations. These companies have formed into a network …coordinated by federations.

Ethics does prevail in the business world after all.

Your reaction?

To supplement the previous post, I found this choice bit of information: institute.coop/news/were-teamin … te-program

This is a good practical response to the issue of who manages these worker co-ops? For if they didn’t have wise management their failure rate would be higher than that of businesses structured in more conventional ways – i.e., in 19th-century ways. Actually these co-op start-ups [as far as I know[ have the same failure rate as do those with the ole, outmoded structure.

I shall be doing further research to learn the truth about the successes of these organizations that put democracy into living action.
Here is the mission of this program at Rutgers School of Management:

Geared toward managers in large firms, small businesses, cooperatives, and non-profits, the program will show participants how to create a values-driven, participatory work environment by:
• Improving transparency when sharing information
• Empowering employees in decision-making
• Developing a management style that fosters participation
• Engaging employees and promoting their growth
• Building organizational citizenship and a high-involvement organization
They apply Ethics, bring it to life.
And, as a bonus, here is yet another good link:
institute.coop/resources/employ … n-solution

What say you?

Cooperative companies work only if all are of a like mind. Cooperatives were the beginning of social business. Pack/herd but leaders will manipulate to be the one. If you really look at cooperates there is leaders that take more. Very very few are truly equal. Humanity is herd. Leaders are still needed and followers give to leaders. I respect what you are proposing and hope that eventually evolution heads there but. It will not occur within enough generations that we will see it. Evolution needs many generations in most cases, not all but, most. We actually have evolved enough to remove many prejudices. We know and accept that the Amazon tribes and the other what we call primitive peoples are humans and equal to a point. We protect their primitive life. Why??? Have you examined this question at all? Why do the governments and elites protect these tribes? What do they have that we do not?

That is exactly what I said in the early pages of the STRUCTURE OF ETHICS booklet!:!: See especially page 6.

sMany of the members subscribe to the Newsletter of the Institute for Workplace Democracy this helps.

It is true, Kris, what you say about some few getting paid more than the others who work in the same shop,office, or warehouse. This is because the company had to hire a manager with special unique skills who could bargain for more pay.

The aborigines of Brazil are part of the ecosystem of the Amazon Rain Forest. They help maintain the forest. The forest serves as “the lungs of the planet.” It consumes the Carbon Dioxide out of the atmosphere, and in turn, provides the planet’s air with pure Oxygen for us to breathe.

An ignorant Climate-Crisis denier (a friend of Donald Trump - another one) is cutting down the rain forest; he has the power to do it. Under-informed or misinformed people voted him in.
Can anyone think of a more stupid thing to do? Well …maybe going to war with Iran. Or establishing bases in The Middle East. …Or stealing Iraqi sweet oil instead of putting full-blast efforts in researching and implementing alternative clean, green energy, such as solar, wind, geothermal and tidal power. [Ironically, George W. put solar panels on the roof of his own home but he went into The Middle East anyway – for the expansion of the American empire.

Comments? Views?

Given the current economic system, called Private Enterprise, it is ethical to recommend and encourage any new small business starting up to organize itself as a workers co-op, one which engages in democracy-at-work, and is structured so that each new hire is automatically a part-owner. What the highest-paid employee (staff member) is compensated shall not exceed, say, six times what the lowest-paid worker gets in pay …if there are more than one dozen worker-owners in the company.

If less than one dozen, they should all start out with equal compensation, and then, - if the proposal to do so is justifiable (is sensible and practical) - vote as a group to give a specific individual more pay than the rest get.

What, though, is ‘Production for Use’ :question:
Can anyone explain it for us here in simple terms? In doing so, tell us the advantages, if any, and the disadvantages if any.

While I was doing research on UBI, came upon this very-interesting column reporting on its progress. You may want to check it out, to learn what is going on in Stockton, California.
See" citylab.com/equity/2019/10/ … nt/599152/

As you know, UBI stands for Universal Basic Income. Experiments with it are currently going on in Finland and (last I heard, still continuing) in Toronto, Canada.

From all accounts, people who receive the grants still continue to work at jobs.