• zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yes, why the fuck not? Social safety nets and access to basic human necessities like food, shelter, and healthcare should not be gated by some arbitrary number of “working hours”.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        because society would collapse. social programs only work by having more people putting into them than are taking out. they are a form of insurance.

        resources are not infinite. the insurance company can’t operate if it’s pay outs exceed it’s pay ins.

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          So your argument is that if everyone has access to basic necessities, society would collapse? What in the slipperiest of slopes are you talking about?

          If your “society” is dependent on people voluntarily going into wage slavery, maybe it should collapse.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            It’s no an argument dude. It’s material and economic reality.

            The problem with the current safety net is we don’t have enough going in. And you want to put less in while everyone takes out more.

            That isn’t how reality works. You seem to think the garden of eden is just a matter of politics. in order for there to be food, medical care, etc, people need to provide it. people need to work.