Universal Basic Income, good or bad? v.07

If you've seen Sir Tim Berners-Lee's presentation about his recent venture solid.inrupt.com

You might feel that the value of one's participation is pretty high. Also, the participation value has been underestimated in the popular business activities. 

To be clearer on that, I invite you to think about how Google and other major social sites are collecting aggregate data on participants, let's say one of them is you, without paying extra money for them. 

I know that the services made available to you by this platform are cheap if not free, but it doesn't mean that the value of your data is always that cheap. And I feel that the idea is a little bit assured by this presentation. 

Furthermore, these data fed into some A.I could produce a huge benefit to anyone who controls the A.I. I'm not saying that they who controls the A.I don't deserve those benefits but maybe It's not inappropriate if the participants could have some share of the benefits as well.

You would hedge the danger of the use of your browsing data by sharing it to the competitors of the service provider, but If you could go further than that and made money out of it, that would not only be good for you but also good for the society. 

The value of one's participation in the system that supports us is great. Just by being alive, just by (relatively) not causing problems, a person's existence is good to be rewarded. And that's my argument for Universal Basic Income (UBI).

Some like Dr. Jordan B. Peterson are skeptical on that idea, the presence of UBI might cost more than it benefits all of us. Because not everybody would use the power provided by UBI to increase the level of availability of mutual solutions in reality. They might use it to destroy themselves, they might use it to destroy others, they might act recklessly and the power of the recklessness would be high because of it. 

It's my conclusion that the people who have helped us need to be rewarded, and people's mere existence is helpful in many ways. UBI is not a bad idea if there's a clear articulation on the relative line between positive and negative participation. If we regulate that the access to UBI should be blocked for a period of time for those who have crossed the line, then I believe that UBI would mostly be positive for the society. 

Edit: A person should reach 18 years old in order to qualify for UBI. This in order to prevent people recklessly brought life into the world. Life is a divine thing, a child deserves to like to keep on living for the rest of his/her life. Without knowing this truthfully is going to be the case, please don't bring a life into this world. 

Hukum berpengaruh untuk jangka panjang

Cuma karena orang-orang jahat di DPR, jangan kita melupakan orang-orang baik yang ada di sana. Bertahan berada di sana saya bayangkan pasti banyak pengorbanan dan tantangan, dan kita mempersulit mereka kalau kita tidak perduli.

Legitimation of a country

As long as there is areas in the world (pretty significant area) that are not territories of a country, Countries in the world has strong legitimation.
Because there's option for people to not live with facilities of other human beings.

Tax for teachers

I think maybe the government could collect taxes and allocate it to past teachers of the subject.
The scarcity of the world is not of time nor energy nor money but of mutual solutions. Teachers are one of the sources of mutual solutions of our mind.
But Teachers in Indonesia or elsewhere often forgotten and live in near poverty, so I think it's fair that taxes collected then allocated to the teachers of the subject.

RUU Pemberdayaan Petani

RUU pemberdayaan petani telah disetujui,
banyak hal-hal yang murah hati yang akan diberikan kepada para petani (mereka sumber solusi pangan kita). Salah satunya adalah pemberian lahan pertanian buat para pekerja tani. Sungguh murah hati dan menurut saya sungguh ide yang bercinta kasih. :)
Terimakasih Tuhan Yesus, terimakasih DPR, dukung terus hokum yang baik.

http://dpr.go.id/id/ruu/153/RUU-Tentang-Perlindungan-dan-Pemberdayaan-Petani

The Obvious, but... (Offsprings are not pension funds!)

Some people might say, social security should be balanced with the restriction of children.
People who live only on live support should not be allowed to have many kids, punishable by sterilization, vasectomy or tubal ligation or other methods...

But

I think this is not accurate, kids are being thrown to rubbish bins and left alone in front of other people's door... This is Crazy.
I say everybody deserve social security just for being good people (honest, and everything that's good in the bible). Because they are fighting for humanity or the inclination to preserve humanity. So that the inclination would be prioritized in this world.
But If you can't maintain a kid please, don't have kids.

Humans are not machines, they could act like machines, but then their job and their lifetime investment of skill would be replaced by robots.
Humans are humans, we live to help people, and to propagate interactions, and to diversify. We are the God of this world, that's how God recruits us... otherwise we'd have no part in His kingdom.
We are the one who reduce people's sufferings, we are the healer, we are the redeemer, we are the Jesus.

Melki's ultimate realization

My thoughts are nothing or dangerous, rubbish without God's word... it should not be separated from God's words. Hereby I say, all of my thoughts are not to be understood independent from God's word.
God's words are the truth, and superior over all. Jesus is my Lord, the Lord of all.