They should try it again, with double the amount.

why not triple?

Yeah, that's totally what I said

or quadruple?

<:think_woke:378717098681171988>

If it works for n, why not for n+1?

Because with n+1 it's not doable

And you don't want to give an amount that will possibilitates to sit on their asses for the rest of their lives

A small amount like 100 euros, just something to go to a movie or something should be doable

There is a trick about welfare... It's doable and it should be done? Yeah, but it can't be with a high amount of money and it needs a certain amount of regulations.


If the Finnish government want to give money to people, they probably can, but it had to be something that's not possible for someone to live with that, it's the same thing with welfare, it has to be something that it's not possible to live solely with that, or else you create a situation where people will join the system just to take advantage of it



@Deleted User @DanielKO

or just don't do it

Maybe, but it's fair to help people who contributed into the system when they need

@Deleted User He wrote n+1, I’m fucking triggered.!!!!

@meratrix reee harder

discrete math is life

git gud faggot

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE <:pepe_smile:378719407977005068> <:pepe_sweat:378719424548569088>

~(AB) = ???

@meratrix

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

it's ~A+~B you dummy

dadoi

no shit sherlock

ehehehe

Admittedly

I don't like UBI

but the n / n+1 argument is actually valid in this case since the basic cost of living is a more-less fixed sum

so eg. if the cost of one-room rent, food, clothing and transport comes out to 300 bucks a month

there's a huge difference between UBI of say 100 bucks and of 400

The big problem is, how do you create an incentive for people to get back into the workforce?

That's what the studies on it are attempting to figure out - if it actually keeps people away from the workforce. As far as I am aware, it doesn't keep them away. At least not in the countries it's been tested in.

Most likely doesn't work the same everywhere. Imagine doing it in Japan compared to, say, Pakistan.

Even keeping it at relative levels, the work ethics of certain cultures are extremely different.

Also, with increasing levels of automation, it is definitely a good idea from a government perspective to keep your hand open, if new jobs do not develop at the same level as they are "removed". UBI, while not solving the problem, can at least make sure that you do not suddenly end up with a large part of your population unable to get a job to support themselves.

In some countries, this could even give these people the time to increase their qualifications through education, to land a job that isn't going to be targeted very soon by automation.

There are plenty of reasonable arguments for this kind of thing, as far as I've been able to gather.

Y'all hear Ken Bone's son got suspended after he posted a pic of himself and his dad at a gun range?

who's Ken Bone

https://www.tenor.co/zZmH.gif

pimp daddy

BONE

is this the bone zone?