No more billing the customer for employees who do nothing
More skilled people to hire
Training employees for the price of training
More people to chose from
No more minimum wage(!)
Free employees who want to learn
Honest short job interviews (starting wages as low as zero)
No more complex pension plans
No more complex insurance
Less medical tests
No more unreliable temp employees
No more employees who hate you with a passion
Less theft and vandalism
A lot more customers as the economy now works for human beings
A lot more businesses to buy from and to sell to as anyone can now start a business
More competition thus more efficiency
More social interaction and empathy
And (I jokingly add) Incentive for employers to stop acting like assholes
And the social benefits and savings are also huge: We could stop breeding massive amounts of criminals whose annual cost is equal to four years at Harvard[1] Police officers would be able to do their job without fear of being killed and without killing people. But the greatest social and economic accomplishment is to set people free from the life of fear that is job insecurity. People can stop living from day to day, dream the big dream, learn what needs to be learned and accomplish the big dream. This might be hard to imagine if you have a nice life and know nice people who are doing well for themselves. But even then you know how nice it is to have help from friends who believe in accomplishment. A few words of encouragement, a bit of help with your weaknesses. Ohh it is a world of difference from being surrounded by people who believe in failure because they've seen nothing else. Imagine the kind of help you would get from friends or relatives who just want to get drunk or high simply to forget what miserable lives they have. They will be there for you every day to remind you that whatever it is you are trying to do won't amount to anything - and then they will enjoy your failures.
Not unlike the people who don't want to see a basic income because other people might enjoy their lives. Those of us who want to build a modern, functional, resilient and happy society have to work with these people who want nothing more than to see others suffer. shrug
Just because your submission has zero votes and no comments doesn't mean you are doing it wrong, it just isn't as interesting as other stuff. I do browse your contributions but I don't have votes to give to new topics, I also try not to comment on anything because it is generally not appreciated when I do. Other people don't even have accounts.
Perhaps if submitting something would cost some karma you could submit as much as you want without feeling guilty. If additional submissions in the same hour/day would be more expensive you could chose to ignore that too.
When democracy was implemented, representation was the technology to use. There was no consideration for the citizen to actively participate in the decision making process because there was no means that allowed for it. The option was never on the table.
They/we might have been a bit slow at times, democratic governments always tried to use the best technology available. Before the internet there was television, before television there was radio. The later 2 [at least] gave us top down communication. The voter could, all of a sudden, stay informed in real time. This was a big deal. We made huge progress right there.
We have internet now, we are obligated to use this to improve our democratic system.
It looks like it today (at least to me) but the reason we have representatives was not because we are to stupid to mow our own lawn. On the contrary, democracy assumes the voter to be competent. Would we not be competent enough to vote on specific things it automatically follows that we are not competent enough to vote at all.
We are the first generation to use representation as an excuse not to get involved.
Our politicians are suppose to guess what we want. Some end up choosing something that makes them rich. Not much of a coincidence there? It might be possible in theory for a representative to represent your interests better than you. But it isn't likely or even a believable scenario.
We might not agree, they do provide us a great service actually. One can never have to many different opinions to consider. It seems online American opinions about what Europe should do outnumber the European opinions 10 to 1. They told us a million times what they think about it.
What do the Russians think? And the Chinese? And the Africans? No one knows? Assuming they even have an opinion about it?
The idea is that we don't want businesses distributing your personal life and we don't want a defamation industry. Imagine the 2 of those combined, it would be powerful propaganda, we would all have to invest in the negative review industry just to compensate. We already have copyrights on everything else, ownership laws that apply to everything except humans. It seems fair for your life belongs to you. It would be something if I couldn't have mickey mouse on my website but could use your face for everything?
On other pages of this website people are being lectured how they should adapt to the website etiquette. I would like to learn how you guys expect Europeans to behave in this context. Should we say what we think? Do you want us to cheer you on? Do you expect us to shut up? How do you want to see this? Just be honest, use whatever language you feel necessary, I'm not easily offended. Here we all thought you would stop eventually, that there would be an end to this. But it has been 34 years now. We've tried pretty much every kind of response. Non of it was what you liked to hear. So, I think it is a fair question? If it isn't, If you think I'm out of line for asking, could you explain why that is? What is the correct behavior for people like myself over the last 34 years. Just your personal opinion, I understand you don't speak for the whole country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPYzY9I78CI