“Off the back” sounds like the wealthy took advantage of folks when, in fact, they entered voluntary contracts in a win-win scenario. Creating a company is not exploitative but rather collaborative and mutually beneficial (with workers).
UBI is not the only solution. Islamic countries have for over 1400 years had the Zakat system, which provides for the poor and needy.
Personally I think everyone deserves a certain level of dignity, especially when they're going through hard times. But I've also seen plenty of examples of people who "work the system", which makes it harder to get funding for social welfare programs.
And it always strikes me as weird how willing people are to waste money and create inefficient systems only to keep some freeloaders from enjoying their life but balk at hunting down rich people for tax evasion, imposing proportional fines for offenses like they do in Finland or closing tax loop holes. I mean I think I understand why but I find it weird.
a) Undeveloped land is freely available, and anyone who wants to can go and cultivate it independently from anyone else, making a life entirely for themselves.
b) All land is already owned, and making a living must be achieved by exchanging (typically labour) with others.
Do you believe that people starting without capital in scenario b) will enter into contracts as freely as those starting without capital in scenario a)?
a) 100% of the world population can relocate globally without any need for visa so they can access the global job market and pick the best location
b) 1% of the world population has access to enough education to become highly skilled and be able to relocate legally. Everybody else has limited choice.
Another example:
a) Everybody has access to UBI and can freely choose to work or study or do volunteering, art etc
b) Unemployed people go hungry, homeless, get sick, get imprisoned
[0] https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-fro...
And that's only minimum wage workers, in a subset of the US.
Was there a particular reason you were under the impression that wage theft was uncommon?
In a market with multiple suppliers and buyers, the price will sort itself out.
That you don't like that price has nothing to do with either side being "evil".
Aren't these valid options? No "cigar smoking fat cat" force workers to sign the contract under duress.
If it's collaborative can we vote a new CEO?
Collaboration doesn't mean forcing others to work with you.
Instead, collaborative is about voluntary choice.
If you want to work somewhere else, under different rules, that would be your choice. Forcing others to do what you want isn't collaboration.
> why can't we vote for it
Co-ops exist. If that is what you prefer then go work for a co-op.
Creating a company _should_ be collaborative, but our current capitalist system has actually become more exploitative.
Take Jeff Bezos' commentary after his ride into space for example:
> I want to thank every Amazon employee and every Amazon customer because you guys paid for all this. So, to every Amazon customer out there and every Amazon employee thank you from the bottom of my heart.
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1417515577275453440
I get it that we, the consumers paid for this trip. But his employees? What do they have to do with this? Isn't it supposed to be a "collaborative and mutually beneficial" relationship, which would imply that Bezos is not making money from his employees, but exclusively through them, and paying them what they deserve? Yet he claims that they paid for it, which implies that he is not paying them what they deserve, since it is the customer who is supposed to pay his salary, not the exploitation of his employees.