spider.jpg (200.99 KiB, 1280x800) google saucenao
CBI No.1055

What are your thoughts on a conditional basic income, where the condition is sterilization?

I'm not an anti-natalist but I'd probably still take this deal. I also feel like it solves a lot of "problems" with basic income. The wagecucks get to feel smug about propagating their genes and this condition would deter enough normies to keep shit flowing.

I've never encountered an coherent argument against this social policy.


I wouldn't take it. The world needs less normalfags for one, not more of them. It may all seem hopeless, but the final test is whether you have successful offspring. The government further encroaching can only spell authoritarianism if not totalitarianism. Maybe it'd be okay for China, India, or Nigeria.


And that'd be your right to not take it. But I'm willing to bet there are a ton of anti-natalist NEETs. Furthermore, this arrangement would effectively disincentivize hypergamy. Women would want the NEETbux just as much as us, and if they decide to get knocked up at least wagecuck tax dollars would no longer go to subsidizing their mistake.


NEETs are hardly full members of society and thus underthink the implications. For example, some NEETs are commies or even worse fascists. The only thing I can see right now that's good is no single mothers.


Well, to be clear single mothers would still exist, they just would no longer be subsidized quite as much by taxpayers. Freedom means the freedom to make bad choices. I disagree that NEETs would somehow "ruin our lives" by getting sterilized, but even if that was the case we deserve that freedom too.


What are these "implications" you speak of? On the individual level I'm too mature to think I'm some "temporarily embarrassed chad" who will grow taller if I got the gym and on the macro-level, fewer people being born is better for the planet as a whole full-stop.


Is this implying that once whites become a minority we'll get more gibs?




can you not spam shitty wojacks