Yes, but if we start with jobs that don't always pay well and benefit us all, that's a good start. We can add more over time. Then we can stop calling them jobs.

It will need to be an absolute necessity once AI and robotics takes more and more jobs. This should be something thats been in the works for years now so that its in place in time, but sadly no one seems to be doing anything regarding it. Personally it should still fall on those companies to pay more if they decide to go with AI and automation so they can cover the expense of the people who no longer have jobs. If the profits are not as high due to this then maybe the push towards it won't be so high.

It is a position not to be controverted that the earth, in its natural, uncultivated state was, and ever would have continued to he, the common property of the human race. In that state every man would have been born to property. He would have been a joint life proprietor with the rest in the property of the soil, and in all its natural productions, vegetable and animal.

But the earth in its natural state, as before said, is capable of supporting but a small number of inhabitants compared with what it is capable of doing in a cultivated state. And as it is impossible to separate the improvement made by cultivation from the earth itself, upon which that improvement is made, the idea of landed property arose from that inseparable connection; but it is nevertheless true, that it is the value of the improvement, only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property.

Every proprietor, therefore, of cultivated lands, owes to the community a ground-rent (for I know of no better term to express the idea) for the land which he holds; and it is from this ground-rent that the fund proposed in this plan is to issue.

— Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice

Eligibility criteria for the Irish version have not yet been announced, so at this point it’d just be speculation.

Standing by for the standard "loicense" joke...

While we wait for that, it might be worth discussing that bit about public art. You could definitely do that, but it might make more sense to simply require that any artistic output be released in a free (within the UK) format with attribution, and have them put some smart looking crest on it saying it was partly funded by this program. Then each submission could be tagged and added to a public art bank, which is then usable (with attribution) by anyone in the country for public works or private usage. And maybe businesses too, if they pay enough into the UBI scheme? Feels risky.

It's art whenever the creator intended it (the piece) to be art. That's what we learned in college(I went to an "arts" school).

Better parameters will be required 🙂

They do in the UK too.

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/kate-nash-lily-allen-onlyfans-music-industry-b1195961.html

The big issue is major companies controlling the industry

quite

i wonder if the irish initiative is just a large scale test for roll out across the country