Trying to reverse climate change won’t save us, scientists warn - eviltoast
  • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    If the jobs aren’t necessary, then surely there’s a way to organize society without those jobs existing.

    This is the fundamental argument behind universal basic income.

    As to the question of how to fund stuff like pensions or UBI without everyone working, the answer is simply to tax those who are working more, especially those making huge amounts of money.

      • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Your response was

        It’s not about necessary jobs, it’s about paying into social security / pensions.

        In my answer those are two topics that are not directly related, although they are linked by both having to do with the economy.

        Hence I gave responses to both topics.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The “necessary jobs” topic is unrelated to the “fund pensions” topic. And the “fund pensions” topic is the one that’s being discussed in relation to population control.

          You brought up a completely irrelevant topic, that’s what I’m saying.

          • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            It comes full circle because the proposed solution is to increase the number of people who are able to work, with the idea that those people will take on more jobs, and those jobs will fund pensions.

            I think this is a bad idea because we already have more workers than useful jobs. An increase in the population wont really help.