Subnostr

So, what other social good could we do with Bitcoin that’s not reliant on the money printer or central government monetary control?

#Bitcoin and Universal Basic Income (UBI)

Small scale and large scale projects, community led not government (and central bank controlled). Can even run a fediment and do it that way.

I’m so excited to explore this more of the coming months/year. No one is talking about it.

The right associates UBI with money printing and communism

The left associates UBI with money printing or more taxation and downplays risks to inflation and central control.

The perfect marriage is UBI and Bitcoin. Hell, I’d be open to exploring basic income projects first for those who need it most if the universal aspect throws too many.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

LpLiberto 1y ago

Bitcoin or not, UBI is ‘free’ stuff. Someone has to give up bitcoin so it can be redistributed. On principle I have no issue with that as long as it’s voluntary and no coercion is employed to force me to ‘donate’ (not like that works with bitcoin).

If I’ve misunderstood or you have more thoughts on this please tell me!

Trey Walsh 1y ago

I am more supportive of community/voluntary, in a bitcoin world! Less of a govt/central control (imagine pilot projects in local communities that’s agreed upon)

So I think we agree 🤙🏻

Chad Lupkes 1y ago

Taking capital from person A in order to give that capital to person B without consent is force, and we should try to avoid that as much as possible. Even voluntary isn't sufficient, because it introduces uncertainty.

Nothing is free, there is always a cost. We have to come to agreement on how those costs will be paid. If a local municipal government set up a bitcoin miner to generate a revenue stream, they could distribute that revenue stream to all citizens of that municipality. No force needed, just a steady income stream.

LpLiberto 1y ago

How would that municipal government fund the mining infrastructure if not by coercive taxation? That, of course, sets the precedent for further coercion for the common good. It’s right where we’re at.

Also let’s assume Municipality A somehow manages to introduce a UBI whereas Municipality B does not. Let’s also assume some generous people in Municipality A donate bitcoin to redistribute as UBI. What if people from Municipality B move to A? Suddenly those generous donors either have to give more to fund everyone’s UBI, or equal UBI is no longer possible, or lower for everyone.

I just don’t see it possible or sustainable based on voluntary donations, and coercive extraction brings us back where we are now.

Chad Lupkes 1y ago

Sounds like you are saying it wouldn't work either way. Because you object to every possible path that has been described. So, what path can you come up with that would get us to the end goal? Any?

LpLiberto 1y ago

I’m by no means trying to destroy the argument or being cynical, just thinking as the discussion moves along. This is all in good faith!

I don’t see a path to UBI without centralisation of resources and redistribution by a central authority. If force is deemed unacceptable, then it must rely on generous donations. If force is deemed acceptable, well…

Of course any group could decide to organise in such a centralised way and to voluntarily give up capital for the common good, but what about the next generation, or any free rider that wouldn’t want to contribute?

Anyway I can stop, I really don’t mean to harass you! My focus and priority is on voluntaryism and individual freedom, so I’m always curious to see what works and not in such a framework.

Chad Lupkes 1y ago

I get it, no worries. This is not a zero point comparison to me. We can't have ALL FREEDOM or ALL SECURITY without a complete change of perspective. Realizing that those are two separate measurement sticks and we want to maximize both is really important. I love Benjamin Franklin, he was actually a distant cousin of mine, but his statement is too simplistic. We don't have to choose one at the expense of the other, we need to maximize both.

If all centralization is bad, then any and all pools of resources and capital are bad. All groups of people that are not borg hive minds. Any democracy where there is a single opposing vote. It can get silly, and it just derails the conversation thread.

A voluntary pooling of capital to buy a bitcoin miner and distribute the rewards has not been tried. Well, it has but it turned out to be a ponzi scheme that I gave up on in the summer of 2018. The current publicly traded companies that are bitcoin miners don't pay dividends, and their stock value sucks. Municipal governments in the US are too scared to try new things, or their afraid to even talk about it. The biggest question is how we get the ball rolling. If I had the capital, I might try, but I don't.

LpLiberto 1y ago

In any case, beyond philosophical or ideological differences I just love to see everyone in the Bitcoin space thinking creatively and wanting to build. It’s a nice change from the fiat mindset.

We’re still very early so I’m eager to see what emerges over the next few years!

Bison 1y ago

I once considered this same notion, as Peter McCormack would always bring up ‘how do we protect the most vulnerable society?’. In the short term, this might be a good idea for those feeling generous enough to give. But the incentive isn’t there longterm imo.

Bitcoin, in itself, is UBI through technological advancements to food and energy security for the human race.

We just need more time back to give to other humans in need.

Trey Walsh 1y ago

Kind of very loosely, similar stuff! I’m excited to explore social good and support with bitcoiners!

I hear many bitcoiners talk about care and support for the community, but they want govt intervention out. So how do we get there when bitcoin really goes big? Is there a balance? What is it?

Ajax 1y ago

This is an important issue and one that needs ventilation. I’m going down the fedimint rabbit hole and could see a fedimint being used almost like a distributed form of charitable trust, with the guardians acting as the board of trustees…