Postcapitalism and the city
Paul Mason
40851

Fascinating and important, as always. Also as always, seems to attract a mixture of responses, some also important, some just strange. (Why on earth imagine that a universal basic income would remove competitiveness? That’s just to imagine that introducing a change in a system — which would remove social security/pension complications and would surely attack concepts like food banks and homelessness — would also affect a fundamental aspect of human nature and the inevitable competition between alternative creations of human minds? On a separate point, one commenter says what is missing is “the primary purpose of spending”, whereas I would have thought that if anything is missing, it is “the primary purpose of work” — it’s not right to think about removing or minimising it, when people often need it to give value to their time. What needs to be removed is exploitative work, employees being used to do what they don’t want for lousy pay in order to get dividends into the hands of owners, rather than being provided with participatory, cooperative, personally satisfying work. I appreciate there are complications here, e.g. sharing in risks as well as rewards, but the point about the significance or the nature of work remains.)

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.