As I was reading about the Research Priorities Lawsuit in loose connection with my current work at Code for America, I got sidetracked thinking about how a guaranteed minimum income would perhaps offload a substantial portion of the burdens - strictly the financial portion, and more so, all areas that financial burdens pour over into (relationships, healthcare, education, etc.) - surrounding behavioral and occupational changes, even in the face of nostalgia toward upholding historical values and pastimes. In the face of mounting efficiencies accruing elsewhere throughout the larger national or international systems that comprise humanity (pesticides use in agriculture in this case), the larger population is often clearly and implicitly in favor of such transitions, and yet the dialogue surrounding the process of actually transitioning all too frequently focuses on the large, non-monetary costs associated with the change (historical value preservation, culture change, reeducation, etc.), while ignoring the financial costs, which may be greater still! Assuming that this discourse is largely an unconscious societal byproduct of our emotional nature, how would guaranteed minimum income affect the situation? What important changes would come to the occupational transition process? Would monetary aspects enter into the conversation to a greater or lesser degree than they do currently? How would the conversation be changed in general?
In this case, I was thinking specifically about a minimum income aspect of any hypothetical standardized income distribution scheme, and I was thinking about the context of the history of CAFF and the Research Priorities Lawsuit specifically. In a larger thought experiment, I might try applying the theme of "How would standardized income distribution have impacted that?" to other historical contexts.
Maybe some other time I'll write my own answers to the questions I posed above; however, given the historical precedent of my de-prioritization of blog-posting (most/all posts are either unpublished, incomplete or nonsensical - intrapersonal), that seems unlikely :)
No comments:
Post a Comment