Hi Lawrence. Thanks so much for taking the time to write such a detailed and thoughtful response to the article. I’m amazed and grateful for the wide array of people from different disciplines that are sharing their opinion. This is exactly the kind of multidimensional conversation we need to be having.

I agree with you that a large part of the problem stems from the fact that people view a UBI policy in line with traditional conceptions of economics, and of the fundamental position of labor within economics. I know the fact that a large part of a UBI would be paid for purely through the merit of implementing such a system is a difficult concept to grasp. Nevertheless it is vital to grasp this concept to conceive the real feasibility of such a policy. In terms of paying for the net cost of a UBI I think we have to become creative. I agree with you that a UBI ought to be appraised as a form of citizen equity. In my eyes, data has come to embody what oil was in the 19th and 20th century: a progress driving asset. Currently the biggest tech companies in the world rely on the data that citizens provide to them for free. Therefore, just as mining companies ought to pay citizens for the resources they extract from the earth, tech companies ought to pay citizens for the data they give away freely. Perhaps this payment could be expressed in the form of a UBI.


Here to share some words | Hopeful idealist | Samurai who smells of sunflowers |

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store