Why food, shelter and clothing should be for free!!!

[DTRV]

Bernie Sanders said healthcare is a human right because he views it as an essential need for well being or even survival. Therefore, it should be free of cost. A certain amount of food, shelter and clothing are NEEDS as well therefore they should also be free. As long as you are a member of the United States, these things should be given to you as bare necessities. Only food, shelter and clothing used for pleasure rather survival should be commodified. Bernie Sanders showed us a political truth that is larger than healthcare.

[msongs]

1. and he will pay for all of it out his own pocket. ok nt

[SoonerPride]

2. Weclome to DU.

We will see if you last.

I think the jury is out.

[demmiblue]

10. Pretty obvious, imo. n/t

[Binkie The Clown]

3. And you think that would work in the real world?

Explain to me who would provide all that free food and clothing? he only way that works is with either slave labor or total robot labor. Slave labor is not moral and total robot labor is beyond our technology for now. Maybe someday when everything in the world from planting crops to mopping the floors in the supermarket is totally automated, then it would be possible.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

7. I'm thinking the idea is it would happen via taxes and charity ...

Obviously nothing is literally free.

Soup Kitchens give out free food, the Salvation Army gives out free clothes, and people can get way under-market prices on housing through things like Section 8.

It's really not that impossible to provide a base/minimum level of these things for everyone.

[Binkie The Clown]

11. Pie in the sky.

It's like so-called perpetual motion machines. Money for nothing and your chicks for free. Anyone who understands the basic laws of thermodynamics and ecology realizes that the planet is already beyond its carrying capacity. We consume something like one and a half planet's worth of resources every year, and it's getting worse and worse. Who's going to mine the ore and work the blast furnaces?

And be honest: If you had the choice of driving a bulldozer in the garbage dump or eating Cheetos and watching Netflix all day, which would you do? So who's going to drive the bulldozer? Who's going to pick up the trash and truck it to the dump in the first place? I'd rather spend my time learning to play the guitar, or writing poetry, or gardening, than stocking the shelves at Walmart. So I'd take that free food, shelter and clothing and spend my time doing those things I really enjoy. Who in their right mind would do any different?

Want to prove me wrong? Buy a surplus cargo ship and start your own floating country out in the Pacific somewhere and show us how it could be done.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

12. I didn't say it SHOULD happen, I'm saying it's totally possible.

If all one got was a studio in a shitty part of town, beans and rice every meal, and surplus shirts from Hong Kong emblazoned with sayings that would get your picture posted to engrish.com (and no free netflix or cheetos) ... then yeah, plenty of people would still work.

AFA the environment part goes, I'm with you 100%. I said I was 'Team Covid' from the beginning because the natural world is being destroyed from overpopulation, and I've never really left the team.

I actually don't particularly support universal health care for the same reason, but I don't advertise that around here

[sir pball]

23. Too nice for free stuff.

Soviet-style (architectural, not political) naked concrete dorm blocks and the most basic, unadorned jumper suits possible; I'll allow the rice and beans, they're about as cheap as you can get. Maybe a little government cheese and Tabasco, I'm not entirely stone-hearted

Literal survival if you don't work, but nothing more. No Cheetos or Valheim or DU or Prime Video...OK, maybe a library because books are cheap and durable. If you'd like anything beyond, it's out of your own pocket.

Oh,.and healthcare of course.

[brooklynite]

33. If this was the system, people here would be ranting about the nice homes the wealthier people had..

...and why they were going to better restaurants.

Also. does your system allow me a choice of vegetarian? Keto? Low-fat?

[sir pball]

35. Rice and beans is already low-fat and vegan!

Of course allowances could be made for legitimate dietary needs, not mere preferences or choices (though absolutely basic menus tend to cover those pretty well by dint of simplicity). Nobody *needs* keto or paleo or South Beach or The Zone - any anyway, if you're only getting 2000 calories a day of rations you're not gonna need any extra diet regimen!

I honestly don't get people who think that basic needs covered by the government should be anything more than absolutey basic (yes I'm exaggerating in what I'd offer, but not by much). You're entitled to a roof over your head and a full belly - not a 2500sf house and a fridge full of artisan farmer's market offerings.

[Revanchist]

37. So the military then?

I had 3-5 person rooms while on shore and 100+ when on the ship and we rocked the blue coveralls!

[joshcryer]

15. Robots.

[Binkie The Clown]

16. Yup. That's why I said "some day". nt

[joshcryer]

17. Still waiting for a sewing bot to come online.

The most known one is vaporware (LOWRY), can't do crap. A proper sewbot would change textiles forever and be a billion dollar industry. But it's an extremely hard problem. Other stuff like food is viable *today* with government investment, couple of tens of billions and you feed everyone with robots. No capitalist investor would even dare touch and and it's not in the governments interest to produce food at the scales that the industrial vertical farms can produce.

[hunter]

30. Most people want to work, to contribute to a family or community.

There's not many people who would be happy living in a tiny government apartment, eating government rice and beans, wearing government clothes, with nothing beyond that to look forward to. People who can live like that are probably unemployable anyways. It's life in a self-imposed prison.

Even homeless people form communities. They're not healthy communities but with government assistance they could be.

Personally, I think we should be paying people to experiment with lifestyles having a very small environmental footprint. We would judge the success of those experiments in terms of happiness. Successful low environmental impact lifestyles would spread, not by any sort of coercion or artificial incentives, but by choice.

Most people suffer jobs that do not make the world a better place. Deep down they know it. They're stuck. Maybe they console themselves with a six pack of beer or a new car, depending on their income.

If we had a very strong social safety net, if finding comfortable alternative work and housing was easy, then many destructive industries of unhappiness would simply evaporate. They'd be unable to find employees.

Unfortunately too many powerful men (and here in the U.S.A. it's nearly all white men) profit immensely from the misery of others. They need those homeless people out on the streets to frighten their wage slaves and keep the rents for crappy housing high.

[DTRV]

36. I agree most people want to work but..

There's not many people who would be happy living in a tiny government apartment, eating government rice and beans, wearing government clothes, with nothing beyond that to look forward to. People who can live like that are probably unemployable anyways. It's life in a self-imposed prison.

The decommodified vital resources for living would be provided by mega corporations/businesses in the real estate, food, and clothing industries.
This redistribution of resources would make the low income bracket have dignified living conditions. For an example, the new low income groups would have apartments free of rats and roaches.

If we had a very strong social safety net, if finding comfortable alternative work and housing was easy, then many destructive industries of unhappiness would simply evaporate. They'd be unable to find employees.

I would add that comfortable and alternative work could pay relatively low but would provide additional resources beyond the given resources necessary for dignified living. People could choose work that paid very little but was rewarding rather than "choose" very undesirable work under our current system in order to survive. Those who refused to work for an employer or create a business to generate profits would be in the lowest income bracket but would have enough material resources to sustain dignified conditions of existence while the rich and middle class would generate additional income through either profits or employed labor.

[Hoyt]

4. Don't totally disagree, but suggest we get healthcare first before piling on with more stuff that

is unlikely to pass in the next few decades.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. Comrade, is now your new free clothes! Is next, daywear. Very nice.

Wendy's - Soviet Fashion Show (1985, USA)
162,087 views•Feb 4, 2018

The Hall of Advertising
285K subscribers

Rumor has is this ad was banned for being offensive. However, this was not the only spot to poke fun at Soviet Russia at the time. Directed by Joe Sedelmaier.

[comradebillyboy]

6. I remember that ad. Just brilliant satire...

[CozyMystery]

8. Before Covid, I got lots of very low cost clothes

at Goodwill. The most I paid was $7 for lined, high quality brand name, in perfect condition, spring coat. The funny thing that happened was I got on an elevator with a man who said he owned and had worn the same coat every spring for 35 years. I was astonished.

All the the clothing I bought was like that coat. This was especially helpful as I lost weight from a size 10 to a size 6.

Of course, I donated the clothing promptly as I lost weight because I didn't want to have the assurance that if I gained the weight back, I would have clothes to wear.

And, of course, I decided that at size 6 my face looked way too thin and old (I looked like a hag), so I settled on size 8, and had to donate the 6's and buy more 8's.

The point is there are lots of great clothes at Goodwill near me, and also in the Atlanta stores. The key is to choose locations that are large and are in more affluent areas.

[eShirl]

9. UBI is simpler imho

[DTRV]

13. The problem with ubi

With the choice between either using UBI or nothing, I'll pick UBI. However, the flaw in UBIs is that it may fail to adjust to inflation. It also does not set a uniform standard of dignified living. For an example, as a society we must decide what quality of house one should be given to live in.

[Irish_Dem]

28. So if you and I were tasked with the UBI roll out, how would we iron out the problems you cite?

We would have to ask the economists about inflation in a world with UBI. I am also assuming UBI in response to increased automation and lack of jobs for most people. Maybe inflation would not be an issue then?

It is possible that once people have their basic needs met, and are no longer anxious about money, preferences will change.

There will be a more common view of what it means to live a dignified life. The over the top, flashy, greedy lifestyle will be a thing of the past? A more simple, but classic, comfortable style of living would be the norm.

With 3D printing perhaps we will be able to make whatever style of house we want, at a low cost?

[Hortensis]

29. MAY fail to adjust with inflation? The ideological composition of

our governments, and their goals, are subject to change every couple of years. Of course everything would be underfunded and services cancelled when conservatives were in power, and of course, when liberals were in power, they'd be desperately trying to keep the systems our lives had all come to depend on from collapsing. Or more likely dismantling a system too dysfunctional to continue.

Obviously, a universalist system would require a universalist government, and how long until that collapsed?

This whole thread is silly. Nothing's free.

"...what quality of house one should be given to live in." In this picture, losing individual freedom and responsibility would be horrific costs. Not just to the individual but society. Who's running that universalist government, because for sure majorities didn't vote to bring it on themselves? Who's maintaining these "free" residential units?

Now, we do have the capability to shorten the work day or week a great deal, most goods will be produced relatively inexpensively, and a UBI funded by our production is possible, so that general wellbeing and prosperity, without the burden of working long hours just to get by, are ours if we want it. Without turning the people into wards of the state.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

14. What will you be contributing? NT

[brooklynite]

18. So...nutriloaf?

[DenaliDemocrat]

19. Welkome Komrade

I smell pizza!

[alphafemale]

20. Some very basic things. Yes.

But then everyone should also do some type of work to their level of ability.

If it is just something like reading books or newspapers to recordings for the blind.

Everyone is capable of something, and the Infrastructure goals is going to need many people working.

Like the Civil Conservation Corps and the Tennessee Valley Authority that got people to work and improved the way of life for many bringing them electricity and running water.

[Irish_Dem]

25. Yes in this paradigm people would contribute to society at their level of ability.

No job would be better than others. All work would be of value.

[TomSlick]

21. To be clear, are you being serious or sarcastic?

Are you really suggesting that food, shelter and clothing should be provided by the government free or is this a sarcastic argument against universal health care?

[NickB79]

22. Soylent Green?

[Bucky]

27. Have you tried the new trail mix flavor?

So yummy and delicious, you'll feel like your pioneer ancestors are part of you

[hunter]

32. Why eat that factory processed crap when you can hunt your own?

-- Hannibal Lecter

[Irish_Dem]

24. You are correct in your thinking. At some point most jobs will be automated.

This means we will have to figure out how to provide food, shelter and clothing for the humans on this planet.

But as you point out there are some bugs to work out on a practical level.

Welcome to DU and I am glad you are posting here.

[Bucky]

26. For people who need and can't buy these things, sure. But there are charities already

An abled bodied person should work. Work gives you purpose, dignity, a sense of contribution to the community, and most importantly a sense of self-empowerment.

The biggest problem with the Tucker Carlsons and Matt Gaetzes of the world as they never had to work to him their life. They just bumbled into positions of influence & power. And that's why they're such entitled dicks.

I mean, rich people are always going to buy more and better stuff for themselves. But we need a culture and economy that rewards work, not wealth. It doesn't have to be back breaking labor; it just means to be the contribution that each human being's capable of making to our society.

[brooklynite]

31. What does it say that no Government in the world does this?

That progressives like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez don't endorse it?

[betsuni]

34. Democrats have said healthcare is a human right for decades.