Haver

Sorry, income = inheritance. 100 per cent inheritance tax. I changed the typo. The thought here is that transferring capital between generations raises barriers to markets (i.e. education) and affects the fair starts idea. If you like to work little, basic income allows you do that (although as Van Parijs says, it remains to be seen how quickly we would be able to establish a UBI at subsistance level). He says that a surfer has every right to enjoy his slice of land/resources and not work. He also says that most people want to work, especially meaningful work. Most unemployed people are not happy being unemployed.

No. Citizens are free to earn as little or as much as they want. The idea of acquiring capital isn't the issue. The issue is that those who don't have capital cannot live a free life, and the terms for gaining capital are in the main luck-based. If I am born in a wealthy country, I can acquire capital. If I am born to a wealthy family, I can acquire capital. If I am born intelligent, I can acquire capital. If the reverse of those three things are true (I'm born in a poor country, to a poor family, and with low intelligence and likely a poor education), then I cannot acquire capital, or at least have a tremendously hard time doing it, through no fault of the citizen. It is luck. So a basic income system guarentees that everyone has enough to act freely. It is also about the terms of work. Some people like to work a lot, some like to work a little. Our conceptions of what is a good life shouldn't affect our freedoms, considering we have a natural right to a fair share of land and resources as a minimum. Basic income enshrines that right. The safety net of a UBI also allows us to pursue more meaningful work. It is a multi-layered idea.

Well if you are interested, this is the basic idea. There's two fundamental thoughts. A) for people to enjoy 'real freedom' in a capitalist system they need capital B) the terms for acquiring capital are unfair (employability is dependent on luck-based factors, there are not enough good jobs to go around, requires a certain vision of what a life should be like) Not having capital means that many people are not free to do what they want. This applies to the jobless and those forced into jobs that have undesirable or unfair conditions. A basic income for all, an unconditional income at the highest possible rate, would allow everyone to experience 'real freedom' by allowing them to do the things they want (pursue their idea of the good life) and have a fairer entry into the job market (i.e. you don't *have* to take a bad job). Take for example a cleaner who is asked to work unfair hours, and cannot quit because she/he needs the money. Alternatively, a child born into poverty cannot get access to books because he/she cannot afford the bus. In most of the literature the capital required for such a scheme is derived from natural rights to a fair share of natural resources, a 100 per cent inheritance tax that means everyone gets a fair start, regardless of intergenerational wealth, and for some, a system of 'job rents' (an income tax) in times of job scarcity (where there are not enough jobs to go around). It is also a solution to the 'luck' problem: who we are, the skills we have, the access to key markets (education etc) we have are the result of the family/culture we are born into. This offers guarenteed fair starts for everyone.

This is the Young Green's page (http://younggreens.greenparty.org.uk/AboutUs/Policy/CitizensIncome) but it doesn't really discuss or explain the thoughts behind the policy. Van Parijs is probably best at doing that. It also doesn't completely maintain the integrity of the idea, but it's a start.

I'm not interested in arguing or trying to convince anyone on the internet but a) think about your concept of beneficial b) it's not a particularly complicated idea if you read it properly with some coffee

Well read it properly then.

Greens because of their support for basic income (http://www.bostonreview.net/BR25.5/vanparijs.html). Stem cell research is a genuine moral quagmire and shouldn't be thought about lightly. The arguments for it however I think are strong and conclusive and the Greens have got it wrong.

My DS has been out of battery ever since I left sixth form. We used to have time trial competitions with the Kirby game on the first level. It lasted months and months, and the fastest time was like 10 seconds or something. After a while everyone picked up a DS and we would play Mario Kart in breaks/free periods. But now with like six hours of university a week, there's no use for hanging around and it just sits there. The joy of a handheld is incredibly reliant of on your personal circumstances. I imagine now I'll be travelling on the train a lot I'll bring it out again.

At home we have three brothers playing WoW a ton, XBL, people streaming TV, downloading big videos/trailers every so often, and we've never broken 40 I don't think.

The renewed interest in PSP is probably new looks + Gran Turismo, real MGS, Motorstorm etc. Hi Wes. I have finished university and am a bit bored.

Maybe success is a poison! Now it's Nintendo churning out sequels, with PR-bullshit filled presentations, chasing the money.

Just watched the PS conference again. Funny, very little bullshit, fantastic games, a good sense of identity. When the hell did they become the good guys?

I don't own any of the consoles, I play PC, but I have to say that the Playstation conference was really exciting. I don't think there's ever been a better tech demo of the motion-sensing stuff, on Wii or 360 or PS before, than the sword and shield demo. I could actually get behind that. God of War, Last Guardian and the ModRacing (or whatever it was called) game looked fantastic. The track builder was pretty woah. AND UNCHARTED. Xbox conference was pretty good, but lots of sequels. The Forza livery stuff looks fantastic again. TV/DVD stuff is ace. I'll be getting COD42 on PC. Nintendo don't make games for me anymore, sadly. When Reggie said 'every defiency in your swing, every mistake, will be replicated in game' I thought, that's exactly the point. If I want that, I'll go play real tennis. The point of video games always was that you became Nadal. And the PS curator was the least annoying.

Could anyone write a little list of non-'new Nintendo' games they have lined up for me to check out. So no Wii Fit or sports stuff. And not remakes or sequels (sequels in the sense of adding a 2 and some new levels/chars).

So so true.

This is going on my list of things you cannot like if we are to be friends.

Are you guys playing together now? I wouldn't mind coming and chatting with you all. This picture demonstrates how WoW consumed me, just as it did our old friend Bowser57. Maly finally down, finally an xpac where I am there from the beginning :P I'm the female dwarf rogue (best and only on the server, lol)

RELIGION THREAD ROLL CALL I'M HERE

Gah. /jealous. I'm on Dragonblight, medium pop. Very little going on Ally side. Managed to get in on a 10-man for the PVP gear tonight but it was Priest/Hunter drop. First LFM I've seen for the Wintergrasp boss. Everyone who is anyone is in one of the big four guilds so they just get on with it themselves. On the arena point, it doesn't really matter when you start playing arenas in the season. If you ding on Dec 16th and earn your honor gear then, you have just as much chance of arena success as me earning my honor gear this week and starting arenas on Dec 16th. If anything it will be easier the later you start because the better players will have higher ratings. It's more to do with not acquiring PVP gear for PVE purposes but there are other ways of dealing with that than punishing people who like to PVP. :-D I got the whole set for my rogue way back when. I remember going to bed feeling very, very chuffed.

Hmm. Can someone be righteous and feel sorry for the kid in this thread? I don't want to admit that I am becoming that person so if someone else could do that - I would appreciate it.

Blizz need to move that arena start date forward. I wouldn't mind if the new BG and PVP area were any good but they're a pile of shit. If I wanted to play with one-button shooting from turrets and riding vehicles around I'd play Xbox. And no one is pugging heroics. And no one in my guild is remotely close to being ready. The only people having fun on our server are the three or four big guilds. Also, I love this: they put arena requirements on honour gear to prevent skill-less players from getting weaps for PVE and then make honour grinders play in such a way that means they never fight hand-to-hand with their skills.

Storm Peaks is crap if you're a PVPer like myself and have no epic flyer training. Like, game-breakingly go to bed early crap. Thank God it is over and I am being sent to the Skybreaker! GOIN DOON LICH KING

Got a little irritated today (nerdrage) because Blizz seemingly didn't manage to maintain the zone-progression for players who only Solo, no grouping or instances. I thought the deal was that you could either solo it 0-80 or group it - that's the spiel. I went Tundra-DB-Grizzly-Zul Drak (having been sent there each time from the previous zone after completing all the solo quests), then to Sholazar because of the quest directing me there in Dalaran, but after Sholozar is completed you are not sent anywhere. Can anyone shed light on this? There was an invitation to K3 in the Peaks deep, deep down in the Dalaran canals but I doubt that is intended to push players to the Peaks. I have done 93/100 quests in ZD and I'm left with a group quest - anyone know if that group quest leads to a solo quest that points the player to perhaps Crystalsong or the Peaks? I went to the Peaks but I was annoyed because I am a nerd and I like my progression to be neat. EDIT: My lord what have I become posting stuff like this.

I.T. Crowd is in another league but as I am fully prepared to watch junk sitcoms like 8 Simple Rules, a junk sitcom with references to WoW and Halo and the internet is a delight.

The new flavour is like bubblegum. It is very sweet and probably better than the chewy one, whatever that flavour is. Coffee is, was, the best. I am not interested in a list of BNP members - I want the I.P. addresses of everyone who voted against Coffee.