Scott Santens: Wage Slavery Force

Scott Santens Money Quote saying we thought we had gotten rid of slavery as an institution, but we simply evolved it to become wage slavery. Scott Santens said:
 

 

“We didn’t abolish slavery as an institution. We simply went from one form of slavery (chattel slavery), to another form of slavery (wage slavery). Instead of forcing people to work for nothing, we instead let people work for money needed to live, without which they risk death for not obtaining” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is drawing a comparison between chattel slavery and wage labor. He argues that while chattel slavery as an institution was abolished, it was replaced by another form of “slavery” – wage slavery.

Just as chattel slaves were forced to work to avoid death, wage workers must work for money in order to afford basic necessities of life like food and shelter. Without a wage, one risks death from lack of resources.

So while wage workers are not literally owned as property, Santens views wage labor as a type of economic coercion or dependency that functions similarly to slavery. He believes workers have little meaningful choice or freedom outside of participating in the wage system.

Overall, Santens is making the point that abolishing one form of slavery did not eliminate all forms of compelled labor and dependency within the economic system.

Scott Santens: Wasteful or Fatal

Scott Santens Money Quote saying in response to an AOC tweet that there is a difference in errors of omission and errors of commission when it comes to ‘wasting’ taxpayer funds. Scott Santens said:
 

 

“Either someone gets money they don’t need or they don’t get money they do need. One of those can be wasteful while the other can be fatal. Too many people think wasteful is worse than fatal” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is contrasting two scenarios: someone receiving money that they don’t strictly need versus someone not receiving money that they do need to survive. He argues that the former situation of excess or “wasteful” money is not as bad of an outcome as the latter situation where a lack of necessary funds could result in death.

Santens seems to be making the point that it is better for resources to be allocated in a way that prioritizes meeting people’s basic survival needs even if it means some level of excess or inefficiency. According to Santens, preventing potential fatal consequences for those in dire need should take precedence over concerns about optimized efficiency or preventing all wastage of funds.

He appears to be advocating for social policies that favor preventing worst-case scenarios over maximizing strict financial prudence in all cases.

There are two possible "errors" to make here. Errors of inclusion and errors of omission. Either someone gets money they don't need or they don't get money they do need. One of those can be wasteful while the other can be fatal. Too many people think wasteful is worse than fatal.

— Scott Santens🧢🏄‍♂️ (@scottsantens) January 1, 2021

Scott Santens: Perils of Unemployment

Scott Santens Money Quote saying we believe we’d never resort to unethical or even criminal behavior, but when pushed hard with financial pressures things get unexpectedly real and push us further than we wish to go. Scott Santens said:
 

 

“Consider just what we do in order to continue earning money to live. How many lines do we say we'd never cross, but end up crossing when the time comes, to avoid the perils of unemployment?” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is suggesting that many people will reluctantly compromise their principles or values in order to keep their job and avoid the negative consequences of unemployment, such as lack of income and inability to afford basic needs. He implies that when faced with the threat of losing employment, workers may feel compelled to behave in ways they would not otherwise, such as saying or doing things they previously claimed were unacceptable.

Santens seems to be criticizing how the insecurity of needing wages to survive can undermine personal integrity, as people feel pressured into crossing lines or boundaries they had drawn just to avoid the perils of unemployment. His quote highlights the way economic coercion within the job market can diminish individual freedom and force compromise of one’s principles.

Consider just what we do in order to continue earning money to live. How many lines do we say we'd never cross, but end up crossing when the time comes, to avoid the perils of unemployment? This world would be a far better place if no one felt the need to cross their drawn lines. pic.twitter.com/zpBnYk55oI

— Scott Santens (@scottsantens) June 20, 2018

Scott Santens: Human Rights Day UBI

Scott Santens Money Quote saying that December 10, 1948 – the United Nations General Assembly voted to support a minimum standard of living and health care as basic human rights. Scott Santens said:
 

 

“69 years ago today, the world came together to declare human beings had a human right to “an adequate standard of living,” and to this day, no nation has yet recognized that right with both universal health care & basic income” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is referring to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN on December 10, 1948, which declared that everyone has the right to an adequate standard of living.

However, Santens argues that to this day, no country has fully realized and implemented that right by providing both universal healthcare coverage and some form of basic or universal income for all citizens. While some nations may have one or the other, no place has established both as human rights that ensure all people can afford their basic needs like health and living expenses.

Santens is criticizing the gap between proclaiming economic rights and actually fulfilling them in a comprehensive way through policy that guarantees healthcare and a minimum income floor for every person.

69 years ago today, the world came together to declare human beings had a human right to "an adequate standard of living," and to this day, no nation has yet recognized that right with both universal health care & basic income. https://t.co/iO0Vm1tLT8 #basicincome #HumanRightsDay pic.twitter.com/49RICUU6RX

— Scott Santens (@scottsantens) December 10, 2017

Scott Santens: For Want of A Dollar

Scott Santens Money Quote paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin’s ‘For Want of a Horseshoe Nail to illustrate how lack of basic income can destroy a life when human necessities aren’t paid. Scott Santens said:
 

 

For want of a dollar the bus ride was lost. For want of a bus ride the job was lost.
For want of a job the paycheck was lost. For want of a paycheck the housing was lost. And all for want of goddamn dollar
— Scott Santens

Scott Santens is highlighting how a single dollar can have cascading consequences when someone lacks even a small amount of money. In this quote, he describes how the lack of a dollar prevented someone from taking a bus ride, which then led them to lose their job because they couldn’t get to work. Without a job, they no longer received a paycheck, which caused them to lose their housing since they couldn’t pay rent.

So Santens shows how being short just one dollar can set off a chain reaction resulting in much greater problems like homelessness. His point is that living on the financial edge, even a shortfall of a single dollar, can be precarious and have far-reaching implications.

The quote underscores the vulnerability many face without some kind of economic security blanket like a basic income that acts as a buffer against small shortfalls multiplying into major difficulties.

Photo © BudgetsAreSexy.com

Scott Santens: Congress Serves Funders

Scott Santens Money Quote saying the proposed American Health Care Act rewards those who fund campaigns, at the expense of those who need health care the most, those on medicaid and with pre-existing conditions. Scott Santens said:
 

 

“If it wasn’t already clear, the AHCA makes it crystal clear that Congress no longer represents voters. It represents who pays for elections” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is criticizing Congress for passing the American Health Care Act (AHCA) in 2017. He argues that this legislation, which aimed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, demonstrates that Congress no longer truly represents the interests and will of average voters in the United States.

According to Santens, the AHCA showed that Congress actually represents the financial donors and groups such as corporations and lobbyists “who pay for elections” through campaign contributions.

In other words, Santens believes politicians are more accountable to their donors rather than citizens, since the AHCA was widely unpopular publicly but still passed due to influence from moneyed special interests.

If it wasn't already clear, the AHCA makes it crystal clear that Congress no longer represents voters. It represents who pays for elections.

— Scott Santens (@scottsantens) July 3, 2017

Scott Santens: Wealth Shared by All

Scott Santens Money Quote saying because we all contribute to wealth, we should all share in that wealth as universal basic income (UBI). Scott Santens said:
 

 

“A fraction of all wealth should be justly shared with everyone, because that fraction is
created by everyone” — Scott Santens

Scott Santens is arguing that a portion of all wealth in an economy should be shared with all members of society because that wealth is collectively created. He believes that since everyone participates in and contributes value to an economic system through their labor, ideas, consumption and more, they are entitled to a share of the overall prosperity generated. By working together in an interconnected market, individuals help produce wealth that exceeds what any single person could generate alone.

So Santens is proposing a concept of distributive justice where the benefits of modern wealth creation are more widely distributed across a population, on the basis that no person achieves financial success solely through their own independent efforts and without benefitting from social and economic cooperation.