Re:Y Combinator Learns Basic Income Is Not So Basic After All
by coolaliasbro on Monday August 27, 2018 @04:28PM
(#17854221)
I apologise for all the child comments but I find your posts compelling. However, your 3rd paragraph above seems a bit at odds with your idea in an earlier comment to rebuild SROs. In any case, I think the same sorts of housing opportunities should be available to all, which is why I brought up the fact that the USA has ample unused housing, it's mostly just an issue of policy/assholes in power.
Re:Y Combinator Learns Basic Income Is Not So Basic After All
by DoreenMichele on Monday August 27, 2018 @04:31PM
(#17854246)
I don't see how it is at odds at all. Perhaps you could explain that to me.
Re:Y Combinator Learns Basic Income Is Not So Basic After All
by 0x8BADF00D on Monday August 27, 2018 @03:40PM
(#17853818)
> Expecting people to pair off to have a decent place is essentially expecting a polite form of prostitution.
What it really boils down to is that an average middle class family in the past had a full-time housekeeper. Typically, those housekeepers were single women. Nowadays, that same demographic group has kids of their own. I wouldn’t call it prostitution so much as pragmatism.
We have more singles, more childless couples and more single parents. Their housing needs are not being met. We expect young single people to rent an apartment designed for a family and get roommates.
If that works for you, that's already available. The assumption that someone with basic income should get a roommate is an assumption that they really aren't allowed to aspire to the same things as middle class people, like a space of their own.
A lot of women currently de facto use a romantic partner as a means to cover rent and it causes all kinds of problems. Expecting people to pair off to have a decent place is essentially expecting a polite form of prostitution.