[bluntly_said]

I see the Neo-luddism argument thrown out a lot when discussions pop up around basic income.

It's bullshit. Basic Income does not in any way support or suggest opposition to technology. In general, technology has made life better for everyone. It's not an issue that basic income is trying to solve.

The problem is that technology within a capitalist system allows automation to concentrate wealth. It's very easy for the owner of the machines to become increasingly wealthy, and very hard for anyone else to get a foot in the door.

The answer to this problem is not to get rid of the machines. This is not neo-luddism. The answer is to change social policy to spread the benefit of the automation to a wider group. That's what basic income tries to solve.

[chc]

I think this would be better stated without hostile statements like "It's bullshit." That puts the very people you're trying to convince into a defensive mindset.

[bluntly_said]

You're absolutely correct. The expletives come from constantly have to reject this attack, and personal frustration.

It also comes because many of the people who use the "neo-luddism" grouping are not trying to saliently argue about basic income, or any real policy change (income related or otherwise) but are just looking for an easy way to dismiss the speaker.