CDZ Zuckerberg Calls for a Universal Basic Income

[danielpalos]

the idea has been around for a long time

it is cheaper to give every American a basic income like 13 grand

then to continue on the path we currently do with welfare

This much is clear: The various reforms resulted in fewer low-income families getting cash assistance. That was the point, after all. In 1996, 68 out of every 100 low-income families received cash assistance nationwide; but by 2014, that fell to 23 out of every 100 such families.--https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-welfare-dollars-dont-go-directly-to-poor-people-anymore/

We should end the funny money of EBT for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in out at-will employment States.

There is a reason for a sluggish, illiquid economy.

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

 

[jon_berzerk]

the idea has been around for a long time

it is cheaper to give every American a basic income like 13 grand

then to continue on the path we currently do with welfare

This much is clear: The various reforms resulted in fewer low-income families getting cash assistance. That was the point, after all. In 1996, 68 out of every 100 low-income families received cash assistance nationwide; but by 2014, that fell to 23 out of every 100 such families.--https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-welfare-dollars-dont-go-directly-to-poor-people-anymore/

We should end the funny money of EBT for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in out at-will employment States.

There is a reason for a sluggish, illiquid economy.

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

 

[danielpalos]

the idea has been around for a long time

it is cheaper to give every American a basic income like 13 grand

then to continue on the path we currently do with welfare

This much is clear: The various reforms resulted in fewer low-income families getting cash assistance. That was the point, after all. In 1996, 68 out of every 100 low-income families received cash assistance nationwide; but by 2014, that fell to 23 out of every 100 such families.--https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-welfare-dollars-dont-go-directly-to-poor-people-anymore/

We should end the funny money of EBT for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in out at-will employment States.

There is a reason for a sluggish, illiquid economy.

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

 

[jon_berzerk]

the idea has been around for a long time

it is cheaper to give every American a basic income like 13 grand

then to continue on the path we currently do with welfare

This much is clear: The various reforms resulted in fewer low-income families getting cash assistance. That was the point, after all. In 1996, 68 out of every 100 low-income families received cash assistance nationwide; but by 2014, that fell to 23 out of every 100 such families.--https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-welfare-dollars-dont-go-directly-to-poor-people-anymore/

We should end the funny money of EBT for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in out at-will employment States.

There is a reason for a sluggish, illiquid economy.

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

 

[danielpalos]

We should end the funny money of EBT for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in out at-will employment States.

There is a reason for a sluggish, illiquid economy.

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

 

[boedicca]

Zucky is plotting his run at the Presidency. A universal income is just a subterfuge to buy votes.

Just sayin'.

 

[danielpalos]

Zucky is plotting his run at the Presidency. A universal income is just a subterfuge to buy votes.

Just sayin'.

I think Mrs. Clinton would have been president, if she had run on that platform, as well.

 

[jon_berzerk]

it would free up a lot of money and potential

however those greatly into using the system

would not go for it they stand to lose 17 grand or more in benefits

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

 

[danielpalos]

Not sure why; administrative costs would go down by more than that.

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

 

[jon_berzerk]

well two things would change right off the bat

the federal/state workforce that over sees it would be cut way back

and the major recipients would lose more then have of the s they get now

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

 

[Toronado3800]

This idea is gaining steam from people familiar with the coming Robotics Revolution.

For the sake of social stability we need to implement a UBI.

Mark Zuckerberg joins Silicon Valley bigwigs in calling for government to give everybody free money

"Every generation expands its definition of equality. Now it's time for our generation to define a new social contract," Zuckerberg said during his speech. "We should have a society that measures progress not by economic metrics like GDP but by how many of us have a role we find meaningful. We should explore ideas like universal basic income to make sure everyone has a cushion to try new ideas."


Zuckerberg said that, because he knew he had a safety net if projects like Facebook had failed, he was confident enough to continue on without fear of failing. Others, he said, such as children who need to support households instead of poking away on computers learning how to code, don't have the foundation Zuckerberg had. Universal basic income would provide that sort of cushion, Zuckerberg argued.​

/----/
Old Zuckie feels guilty about his new found wealth, so to keep peace with his Libtard Moonbat buddies he globs on to one of their talking points and supports it. It's a smart tactic since it keeps the Libtards off his case. Other billionaires do the same thing. If you appear to support their causes, the Libtards leave you alone. Now go ask Zuckie what he pays the cleaning lady at his mansion.

I bet you were watching the latest post feed and did not notice this is a CDZ thread.

Without the name calling though, you may have a point. Zuckie realizes how much money he has and has no idea why other people can't have more.

 

[danielpalos]

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour; there would no need for a statutory minimum wage on employers.

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

 

[jon_berzerk]

why assume the second part? Unemployment compensation could be fixed at fourteen dollars an hour

at that point that is all gone

13 grand is the max benefit

exceptions apply to the disabled and medical fragile

but that is a small percent of recipients

there is an upper limit that you can "earn"

before the 13 grand is cut off as well

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what

force --LOL

they get cut off

btw 35 grand is hardly rich

 

[JimBowie1958]

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what force --LOL
they get cut off
btw 35 grand is hardly rich

I see no reason why a person cannot turn down their UBI.

Why not?

 

[jon_berzerk]

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what force --LOL
they get cut off
btw 35 grand is hardly rich

I see no reason why a person cannot turn down their UBI.

Why not?

i suppose they could

 

[danielpalos]

Only for that program; which, is better for persons who truly need welfare; Because, capital must circulate, regardless under Any form of Capitalism.

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what

force --LOL

they get cut off

btw 35 grand is hardly rich

A federal program? We already have unemployment compensation for anyone unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. We only need, equal protection of the law.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Only for that program

which program

under plans like he suggests the whole welfare system is taken down

food stamps-housing- unemployment - tanf - gone

you get 13 grand as a base to live off of

exception being for a very limited number of truly needy people

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what

force --LOL

they get cut off

btw 35 grand is hardly rich

A federal program? We already have unemployment compensation for anyone unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. We only need, equal protection of the law.

not sure what you are trying to say

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why that much emphasis on equality over need?

it is not equality at all

it is the basic income folks can operate on

if they want to advance themselves

then take on a job

the cutoff i have seen before the 13 grand drops off

is around 35 grand a year

the rich don't need it. why "force" it on anyone who doesn't need it?

what

force --LOL

they get cut off

btw 35 grand is hardly rich

A federal program? We already have unemployment compensation for anyone unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. We only need, equal protection of the law.

not sure what you are trying to say

He's saying he wants UE benefits even if he quits or never works.

 

[task0778]

Has anyone seen a report or analysis on who gets what? As in numbers? Will every social safety net program be axed? Show me the money, where does it come from. How many of our 320 or so million Americans will get it? Illegals too? If we exclude the top 2%, great but that leaves about 313 million people to cover and that is a lot of money.

To me this feels like another pie in the sky progressive liberal idea with no rational basis for how to pay for it. Just like Universal HealthCare, I cannot support a program that puts a large additional debt on future generations. We ought to be paying for what we do and we're not doing it.

Last thing about UBI, it pretty much removes the incentive to work for too many people. Moving towards a system where the gov't takes care of you instead of you being responsible for yourself is not a good idea IMHO, even if it was fiscally possible. Which it isn't as far as I can tell.

 

[irosie91]

Not a new idea. First time I heard about something like this was when Milton Freedman came up with it; a bill was proposed to implement a plan like this in the late 1960's and early 1970's, with his support, but got tabled in committee by Scoop Jackson. The monetarists should like it, since it keeps cash recirculating around the domestic economy instead of going straight to the top .1% and just sitting there.


Not a new idea---------in fact it was floated by 19th century UTOPIANS ---------1888 BELLAMY-----"Looking backwards" ----
a weird kind of UTOPIAN PROPOSAL NOVEL. Such ideas are the INSTIGATORS of communism -----which does have
a really rotten rep----------based on how it panned out. (I read the silly "LOOKING BACKWARDS" book as a teen-------
but I read all kinds of silly stuff--------no PC back then). Way back then----in the 1888 "novella type thing"-----people were
allocated "credit" -----just for being a person----for all kinds of stuff ----from houses to horses to a place at the public dining
hall of choice. "Looking Backward" is one of many economic Utopia things of that time--------think KARL MARX. In Utopia---
everyone is happy