Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I voted for 15%, but only to get rid of all the other crap we are taxed for.
That would be a deal.
Of course, Dims will never go for it. They campaign on free everything.
Within 5 years of this being implemented the other programs would creep back in.
It would be like immigration amnesty cycles on steroids.
As it stands now, the debt will spiral out of control until taxes eat up everything, which I think is the plan.
It would at least be worth a try. With the GOP in power how are they reigning in debt? Their not and never will.
It would create an army of people making bad decisions, which will require more government programs to correct. It would just add another entitlement we cannot get rid of.
So what is your plan to reduce debt?
Do you really believe voting "R" will do anything?
I voted for 15%, but only to get rid of all the other crap we are taxed for.
That would be a deal.
Of course, Dims will never go for it. They campaign on free everything.
Within 5 years of this being implemented the other programs would creep back in.
It would be like immigration amnesty cycles on steroids.
As it stands now, the debt will spiral out of control until taxes eat up everything, which I think is the plan.
It would at least be worth a try. With the GOP in power how are they reigning in debt? Their not and never will.
It would create an army of people making bad decisions, which will require more government programs to correct. It would just add another entitlement we cannot get rid of.
So what is your plan to reduce debt?
Do you really believe voting "R" will do anything?
I believe we have to see major defaults at the Local/State level first, followed by the fear of it happening at a federal level.
I don't think either party can handle it, but Dems make it worse quicker than the Stupid Party does.
Within 5 years of this being implemented the other programs would creep back in.
It would be like immigration amnesty cycles on steroids.
As it stands now, the debt will spiral out of control until taxes eat up everything, which I think is the plan.
It would at least be worth a try. With the GOP in power how are they reigning in debt? Their not and never will.
It would create an army of people making bad decisions, which will require more government programs to correct. It would just add another entitlement we cannot get rid of.
So what is your plan to reduce debt?
Do you really believe voting "R" will do anything?
I believe we have to see major defaults at the Local/State level first, followed by the fear of it happening at a federal level.
I don't think either party can handle it, but Dems make it worse quicker than the Stupid Party does.
What must be done is for states to amend the Constitution and require the Feds to balance their books.
They must be forced to do it because they will be scared to make cuts anywhere in fear of losing votes.
Yes Medicare for all capitalism would be a good idea to reduce the cost of our healthcare by 80% and add 10 to 20 years to our life expectancys
There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.
As it stands now, the debt will spiral out of control until taxes eat up everything, which I think is the plan.
It would at least be worth a try. With the GOP in power how are they reigning in debt? Their [they're] not and never will.
Crime is very high in the liberal ghetto and it only got high after Liberals got their way with crippling welfare.No , it won't it will just decrease them. When people are better off crime tends to decline.Sory Ed, I meant "put their money" ... I'd better stop making posts when I am falling asleep.You mean where to get the healthcare??Medicare and medicaid are already too expensive. Why not give the money directly to the people and let them choose where to get the money .Minimum wage and unemployment should both be a state by state issue.
It should be based on local cost of living.
The Feds should stay out of this. They are already too deep in deficits.
Ahhh. Well, exactly , at some point people start getting desperate and start searching for alternative sources of income: drug and human trafficking, prostitution, kidnaping, extortion or simple robbery and keeping people incarcerated is not exactly cheap.Exactly. You just wind up creating more worthless parasites, such as Matthew, who think that society owes them a living, and are unwilling and unable to contribute anything back to society.
Free people consume products.
Does this mean people wouldn't go looking for these sources of income if they had money thrown at them for doing nothing? People don't stop trying to make money simply because they have a little.
It is not that people will stop looking for sources of income , it will most likely be the case that such sources are rare and or require a very high level of specialization and skill. The minimum income will help them achieve such level.
Yes, it will. But it doesn't stop drugs, prostitution and other such things in any way at all.
In place of all the other social safety net programs it would probably be a very efficient way to help make people somewhat mature about spending money, this would be especially true if there was a 10 hour a day work requirement associated with the welfare guaranteed minimum wage.While I like the theory of a universal minimum income, I don't think in practicality it would work.
Socialist? If you have evidence of that I will pay you $10,000. Bet?Yes Medicare for all capitalism would be a good idea to reduce the cost of our healthcare by 80% and add 10 to 20 years to our life expectancys
Being that you obviously are a far left Socialist it is understandable that you have not a clue as to what determines life expectancy. It would make amusing reading were you to make an attempt to educate yourself.
Socialist? If you have evidence of that I will pay you $10,000. Bet?Yes Medicare for all capitalism would be a good idea to reduce the cost of our healthcare by 80% and add 10 to 20 years to our life expectancys
Being that you obviously are a far left Socialist it is understandable that you have not a clue as to what determines life expectancy. It would make amusing reading were you to make an attempt to educate yourself.
So? If I disagreed I'll pay you $10,000. Bet??Socialist? If you have evidence of that I will pay you $10,000. Bet?Yes Medicare for all capitalism would be a good idea to reduce the cost of our healthcare by 80% and add 10 to 20 years to our life expectancys
Being that you obviously are a far left Socialist it is understandable that you have not a clue as to what determines life expectancy. It would make amusing reading were you to make an attempt to educate yourself.
The idea of a minimum income comes from rather conservative schools of economic : the chicago school (e.g. Milton Friedman) and the Austrian School ( Hayek ). Their point is that the government is not good at managing programs and the best way to provide a safety net is through a direct transfer.
As far as I am aware no mothern economist has proposed a system with no social safety net at all.
This is true just like the majority of products for sale on the market are priced at their exact worth. This is a basic concept but a liberal lacks the IQ to understand it.There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.
The overwhelmingly vast majority of workers are paid their exact worth.
Fresh "catechism" from right wing think tanks?I am advocating for ending my "entitlement" to a "War on Drugs".There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.No , it won't it will just decrease them. When people are better off crime tends to decline.
Yes, crime is lower in countries with people who are better off. The problem is you're not making them that much better off.
Switzerland has a low crime rate because it has a high GDP. You're not making a higher level of GDP, the GDP will stay the same.
Now, what happens to people who decide they no longer need to work any more because they'll get a minimum income whether they get up in the morning or not? Well, it will mean that places that currently employ people who earn lower than this wage will have to pay more. So they pay more for their workers, they're going to have to charge more for their products. They charge more for their products then food prices increase, which means that those people who earn more will be less well off. And then they'll start demanding a pay rise. So then the minimum amount that is being paid to the low paid workers suddenly isn't enough to let them live because the food prices have just increased, and everyone else is earning more than them again and you're back where you started.
What would be better would be to make people good workers. Give them skills to do a job. Give them opportunities to do that job. Encourage them to work. The best way to encourage people to work is to not hand out free cash to them.
You sound like someone on entitlements. It's never enough, is it?
If you don't want someone telling you what you are worth, then start your own business. It's the only way you are ever paid what you are worth.
Right, people are making too much selling illegal drugs, so the state must destroy it.
are you on the right wing?Employment is at-will in most US States.No fear for automation at all ?Zero, get a fucking job
.
Paying people to do nothing is not the answer to unemployment caused by automation. All you do is create a restless idle underclass.
People (most people) need to be kept busy and given a purpose, even if that purpose is handing out French fries or digging a ditch.
And your point is? Do you want to return to some form of serfdom?
Why do we even have the need for Government, if there is no, underpayment to correct for any unemployment?There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.
The overwhelmingly vast majority of workers are paid their exact worth.
are you on the right wing?Employment is at-will in most US States.No fear for automation at all ?Zero, get a fucking job
.
Paying people to do nothing is not the answer to unemployment caused by automation. All you do is create a restless idle underclass.
People (most people) need to be kept busy and given a purpose, even if that purpose is handing out French fries or digging a ditch.
And your point is? Do you want to return to some form of serfdom?
employment is at-will in our at-will employment States.
Labor as the least wealthy should be able to have recourse to equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will, for unemployment compensation purposes.
What if, we solve simple poverty by correcting for laissez-fair capitalism's laziness regarding full employment in the market for labor?While I like the theory of a universal minimum income, I don't think in practicality it would work.
links or it didn't happen.Crime is very high in the liberal ghetto and it only got high after Liberals got their way with crippling welfare.No , it won't it will just decrease them. When people are better off crime tends to decline.Sory Ed, I meant "put their money" ... I'd better stop making posts when I am falling asleep.You mean where to get the healthcare??Medicare and medicaid are already too expensive. Why not give the money directly to the people and let them choose where to get the money .
Ahhh. Well, exactly , at some point people start getting desperate and start searching for alternative sources of income: drug and human trafficking, prostitution, kidnaping, extortion or simple robbery and keeping people incarcerated is not exactly cheap.
Free people consume products.
Does this mean people wouldn't go looking for these sources of income if they had money thrown at them for doing nothing? People don't stop trying to make money simply because they have a little.
It is not that people will stop looking for sources of income , it will most likely be the case that such sources are rare and or require a very high level of specialization and skill. The minimum income will help them achieve such level.
Yes, it will. But it doesn't stop drugs, prostitution and other such things in any way at all.
The only thing the right wing does while claiming a work ethic from the Age of Iron is important modern times, is insist the poor have to "learn how to fish" but only provide the example of "catching red herrings", for their effort.In place of all the other social safety net programs it would probably be a very efficient way to help make people somewhat mature about spending money, this would be especially true if there was a 10 hour a day work requirement associated with the welfare guaranteed minimum wage.While I like the theory of a universal minimum income, I don't think in practicality it would work.
