Why not solely a Job Guarantee?
A reply to this piece. Curiously expanding on the concepts outlined in my previous post a bit, I guess.
If participation in a JG scheme is mandatory (be it by some economic circumstance), and only mandatory for some people, then quality of opportunity offered (measured in how the individual feels about the way the time is spent, and customer spending on the output), must be equal or greater, than what people free of this mandatory participation can enjoy, people who are free to only spend their bright waking hours in occupations created by private entrepreneurs (or they could just become entrepreneurs themselves). Because those free people would simply get all the good opportunities then, while everyone else is left wanting.
Alternatively, a JG scheme that requires the same amount of time commited from every single person who is part of the society, can sidestep that issue, as everyone would have to spend the same amount of time in a relatively less productive/enjoyable manner.
Or of course, not making a dignified existence within society dependent on participation in a JG to begin with. The purpose of a JG scheme is not with providing people an income, but rather with a job (that is, for people who want one), anyway, so I don’t see why someone would want to connect the two to begin with, unless communism with mandatory labor services for everyone was the goal. Maybe not a terrible goal, but at least put the mandatory participation for everyone first, then.
Anything else is a speedway to feudalism, royalty, which in practical terms, boils down some people having all the merits of owning things, and the freedom to not work due to that luck to own said things, by some line of ownership succession. While the pie grows potentially for everyone, but the slice is reduced for those who are not owners.
Anyway, I do believe that as long as there’s improved customer spending power, something easily achieved by the means of a UBI, it is an easy task for private entrepreneurs (and people who want to become such), to create the meaningful jobs and ways to spend one’s time. Whether you want to be the entrepreneur who envisions the realization of a project, where available customer spending allows it, to the extent that it allows it, or the worker who just does the work for such a person, for a compensation that is derived based on how much customer spending is available for a personal profit to be split between entrepreneur and worker. This could be discussed on a level playing field, between worker and entrepreneur, given a UBI.
As much as I don’t hate the concept of the state creating well paid opportunities to make the country better, by a democratic mechanism, that people or companies are free to take up. Making countries a better place is a good thing. Having a budget for that stuff, and for providing people a baseline merit from respecting the existence of property titles on things that anyone could just as easily originally appropriate and individually benefit from, but that happen to be owned by someone else represented by society already, thanks to lucky circumstances or bitter negotiations, that’s something to consider.