>You can't pay for someone to not work for 20 years; who's going to pay?
For one, people pay pension savings throughout their careers (in most civilized countries).
Second, we've already discussing UBI for life, compared to which "paying people not to work for 20 years" is nothing.
Third, money to pay people is an artificial construct, which is not really what's missing. We have the wealth to sustain them. E.g. we have increased productivity dozens of times over the past 100 years, and yet we don't enjoy those fruits in increased leisure time or work-less access to food, health, studies, shelter, etc. If anything the latter have inflated many times over. Where are those "trickle down economics"?
>Productivity is what generates wealth, and we can't afford to have a large class of people merely consumptive.
We have increased the productivity of the average worker dozens of times over the past 100 years. How's that wealth distributed?
For one, people pay pension savings throughout their careers (in most civilized countries).
Second, we've already discussing UBI for life, compared to which "paying people not to work for 20 years" is nothing.
Third, money to pay people is an artificial construct, which is not really what's missing. We have the wealth to sustain them. E.g. we have increased productivity dozens of times over the past 100 years, and yet we don't enjoy those fruits in increased leisure time or work-less access to food, health, studies, shelter, etc. If anything the latter have inflated many times over. Where are those "trickle down economics"?
>Productivity is what generates wealth, and we can't afford to have a large class of people merely consumptive.
We have increased the productivity of the average worker dozens of times over the past 100 years. How's that wealth distributed?