[appreciatorBus]

IMO this describes the author of the article. They have an emotional discomfort with various inequities & inequalities which drive their advocacy of UBI & other measures and they aren't interested reason, arguments or logic. The guy has been obsessed with UBI since he was 15, no one is going to talk him out of it, no matter how bad the evidence is.

[globalnode]

>emotional discomfort with various inequities & inequalities

you say it like thats a bad thing

[appreciatorBus]

Not at all.

Feeling emotional discomfort with inequities and inequalities is a common human trait, probably nearly universal.

But there’s no reason to suspect that that discomfort is a good guide toward solutions that help more than harm.

That sort of facile engagement with the problem is what gives us disastrous ideologies like communism.

[card_zero]

Potential confusion of valid moral arguments with emotional arguments, though.

I mean, one might conceptually bundle together practicality, pragmatism, and logic, and then say that caring about anything or having any principles or values is emotional and illogical. (This also gives us disastrous ideologies like communism, and may also be used to force favorite ideas because they're "scientific".)

[globalnode]

what dont you like about communism? do you even know? not a huge fan of extremism personally im just curious on your take.

[itsdrewmiller]

The article itself seems quite reasonable - why do you say the author isn’t interested in logic?