this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2025
279 points (90.0% liked)

memes

17645 readers
2076 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I don't know how relevant this is now, but here's a link to another post where I expressed my thoughts on what kind of pitfalls you might most likely face -- https://lemmy.world/post/36867409

By the way, what is this phenomenon on Lemmy? Let's say people are reluctant to read and comment on old posts published just a couple of days or a week ago, but with new ones, it's a completely different story. What kind of psychology is this? Or it seemed to me?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I have been workshopping a "Universal Ranked Income" concept, where UBI provides all necessities, while capitalism is used for luxury goods. For example, you get free generic shampoo and conditioner. If you want versions that are scented or have different properties, you spend money. All money is for getting upgrades to lifestyle - bigger beds, vehicles, houses, ect, but the state provides free but boring goods and services as a baseline. Capitalism has to compete against free.

The way I figure, doing it this way allows us to have the best qualities of capitalism, while preventing the hostage leverage that needing food, shelter, and general wellbeing that corporations exploit against people. By ensuring people have what they need, they can essentially unionize by default - the corporations can't force them nor their families to genuinely suffer for refusing to work bad jobs.

Unfortunately, there are complaints about my concept creating 'castes', since I want absolute limitations on wealth, fixed incomes, and want each job to fall into a rank of income according to difficulty, education, and risk that is involved with that type of job. IMO, a national standardization of incomes and job requirements that employers can't manipulate is key to egalitarianism.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

That would effectively create a planned economy. In theory it could work. Unfortunately, the human element cripples it. How do you rank the value of doctors against cleaners? How do you rank bananas against bread? The core elements were tried with communism, and found to fall severely short.

What has been found, in Africa, with micro loans/grants is that people are a LOT more efficient at maximising value locally than a lot of applied rules. Giving them money (e.g. to start a business) is a lot more effective than giving them resources directly. It uses capitalism to optimise on the local scale.

One of the key things with UBI is letting people and businesses sort things out on the small scale. While capitalism has massive issues, it's VERY good at sorting this sort of problem.

My personal preference would be a closed loop tax based system. Basically, a fixed percentage of money earned (e.g. 15%) is taxed on everyone. That is then distributed on a per capita basis. There would be a cutoff point where you pay more than you receive. The big advantage is that it's dynamic to the economy. If the economy shrinks, then UBI shrinks with it, encouraging people to work more to compensate. It provides a floor of income, letting people negotiate working conditions, without the fear of homelessness. It also channels money from the rich, where it moves slowly, to the poor, where it has a far higher velocity.

[–] cheers_queers@lemmy.zip 0 points 9 hours ago

Keeping people in grinding poverty is an essential function of capitalism tho.