Secretary Clinton almost ran for president on universal basic income

[Missouri_Mike]

How much would universal income be?

 

[g5000]

Clinton is more dumb as we thought.

Not really, she may be on to something.

Her idea isn't bad, it's just how she would have wanted to fund it that's anti-capitalist.

I read an article (and started a topic) on universal income some time ago and I forget the name of the country that was going to put it to a vote. However unlike Hillary, their universal income was going to be funded by the elimination of all social programs. Here is what they came up with:

First eliminate all social programs including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, SNAP's, SCHIP's, Food Stamps, WIC, HUD, Unemployment, all of them. Next, use that money to pay every adult $18,000 a year if I remember the figure correctly.

So now you have a tax free check of 18K every year. From that point on, it's all up to you what you want to do with it. If you can live on 18K a year plus a part-time job, go for it. Or perhaps you are married, you and your wife will receive 36K per year combined and retire. If you are younger, you can work full-time if desired and just use that money to repay a mortgage or invest. You do whatever you want with it.

If you want to have children or have more children, fine, but don't look to government for any money. You get 18K a year and that's it.

After they ran the numbers, they found it would cost the government much less money than maintaining their social programs. Plus nobody would have any reason to complain about the poor. The poor get the same as you do. If they want to have five kids, they have to support them--not us. If they want to get fat on that 18K a year instead of food stamps, fine, it's their money. They have no reason to complain about the middle-class or wealthy either. They will use their 18K checks for investments or perhaps an IRA account.

Such a system could eliminate the homeless. It would make the poor much more responsible since they would not be rewarded for irresponsible behavior as they are now. Nobody rich, poor or anything in between would have any right to complain about another social class. Every kid has a chance to attend college. We could eliminate thousands of government jobs who push paperwork and write the checks. We would save a ton of money too.

None other than the great libertarian economist Milton Friedman supported this idea. He called a basic guaranteed income a "negative income tax".

 

[g5000]

Why Milton Friedman Supported a Guaranteed Income (5 Reasons)

1. To Reduce Government Bureaucracy
A single guaranteed income program could replace the current government maze and mess of 126 separate anti-poverty programs.

2. The Efficiency of Free Markets
Markets allow people to vote with their dollars. Businesses must compete for these dollars/votes by offering a better price or higher quality product. That goes for food, housing, nearly anything. But in order for this voting power to work, people must have at least a minimum amount of money to vote with, and they must have the freedom to choose how to spend it.

3. To End the Welfare Trap
With a guaranteed income it pays to work. You can always work to earn more. However, the current welfare system punishes you for working. If you take a job and increase your income, you lose your benefits. A guaranteed income removes that disincentive to work, and allows everyone to earn more without being penalized.

4. To Enable Work
Removing the burden of needing to earn an income, even partially, will help enable people to do work that is otherwise not compensated in a free market economy, such as charity or volunteer work.

5. Justice & Equality
Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King proposed a guaranteed income to promote justice and equality. Milton Friedman (although more concerned with reducing government) agreed

 

[g5000]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not really, she may be on to something.

Her idea isn't bad, it's just how she would have wanted to fund it that's anti-capitalist.

I read an article (and started a topic) on universal income some time ago and I forget the name of the country that was going to put it to a vote. However unlike Hillary, their universal income was going to be funded by the elimination of all social programs. Here is what they came up with:

First eliminate all social programs including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, SNAP's, SCHIP's, Food Stamps, WIC, HUD, Unemployment, all of them. Next, use that money to pay every adult $18,000 a year if I remember the figure correctly.

So now you have a tax free check of 18K every year. From that point on, it's all up to you what you want to do with it. If you can live on 18K a year plus a part-time job, go for it. Or perhaps you are married, you and your wife will receive 36K per year combined and retire. If you are younger, you can work full-time if desired and just use that money to repay a mortgage or invest. You do whatever you want with it.

If you want to have children or have more children, fine, but don't look to government for any money. You get 18K a year and that's it.

After they ran the numbers, they found it would cost the government much less money than maintaining their social programs. Plus nobody would have any reason to complain about the poor. The poor get the same as you do. If they want to have five kids, they have to support them--not us. If they want to get fat on that 18K a year instead of food stamps, fine, it's their money. They have no reason to complain about the middle-class or wealthy either. They will use their 18K checks for investments or perhaps an IRA account.

Such a system could eliminate the homeless. It would make the poor much more responsible since they would not be rewarded for irresponsible behavior as they are now. Nobody rich, poor or anything in between would have any right to complain about another social class. Every kid has a chance to attend college. We could eliminate thousands of government jobs who push paperwork and write the checks. We would save a ton of money too.

Why not just cut out the middle man and not collect the taxes that funds the $18K a year? That way the economy would boom and if anybody was poor it would be their own fault.

Might be a good idea but the people on the dole would scream bloody murder since they don't work or create wealth; only the working would benefit.

With universal income, everybody benefits working or not. Nobody could ever complain.

I don't really care if the welfare queens complain. The cost of government in this country is too much and we need to cut out all welfare, subsidies, entitlements and bailouts.

Agreed, but do you think that's even a remote possibility?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Of course not. We will never do the right thing and do away with the welfare state.

Agreed, so this idea of universal income might not be too bad of an idea if we could use it to replace all social programs.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Missouri_Mike]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

 

[deanrd]

she didn't do it because the numbers didn't add up. thoughts?

Hillary Clinton almost ran for president on a universal basic income

The more Secretary Clinton goes on TV and promotes her wonderful election loss, people in the middle say: "Oh wow, thats why I voted Trump"

Wow, she looked at numbers and data?

Republicans don't do that with their fuk the poor and sick and black and Hispanic and Muslim and disaster victims and others agenda.

But even if they did, would any of their policies change?

 

[martybegan]

Clinton is more dumb as we thought.

Not really, she may be on to something.

Her idea isn't bad, it's just how she would have wanted to fund it that's anti-capitalist.

I read an article (and started a topic) on universal income some time ago and I forget the name of the country that was going to put it to a vote. However unlike Hillary, their universal income was going to be funded by the elimination of all social programs. Here is what they came up with:

First eliminate all social programs including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, SNAP's, SCHIP's, Food Stamps, WIC, HUD, Unemployment, all of them. Next, use that money to pay every adult $18,000 a year if I remember the figure correctly.

So now you have a tax free check of 18K every year. From that point on, it's all up to you what you want to do with it. If you can live on 18K a year plus a part-time job, go for it. Or perhaps you are married, you and your wife will receive 36K per year combined and retire. If you are younger, you can work full-time if desired and just use that money to repay a mortgage or invest. You do whatever you want with it.

If you want to have children or have more children, fine, but don't look to government for any money. You get 18K a year and that's it.

After they ran the numbers, they found it would cost the government much less money than maintaining their social programs. Plus nobody would have any reason to complain about the poor. The poor get the same as you do. If they want to have five kids, they have to support them--not us. If they want to get fat on that 18K a year instead of food stamps, fine, it's their money. They have no reason to complain about the middle-class or wealthy either. They will use their 18K checks for investments or perhaps an IRA account.

Such a system could eliminate the homeless. It would make the poor much more responsible since they would not be rewarded for irresponsible behavior as they are now. Nobody rich, poor or anything in between would have any right to complain about another social class. Every kid has a chance to attend college. We could eliminate thousands of government jobs who push paperwork and write the checks. We would save a ton of money too.

Nice theoretical application, but you know the idiots would blow their $$ on stupid shit, and will then look to government to bail them out. Then all those programs will return, one by one, until we are back where we are now, except with even more government control.

It's the same as trying to implement a national sales tax to replace the income tax. sooner or later they will want a new income tax ON TOP of the sales tax.

 

[miketx]

That would have tripled unemployment.

 

[Votto]

Liberals are delusional, they push this whack job socialist crap and think most of the country supports it then they are gobsmacked when they get wiped off the map in elections its hilarious.

\
Wut?

You mean health care, retirement, education, butt wipers, they should not all be free?

The hell you say.

 

[g5000]

Clinton is more dumb as we thought.

Not really, she may be on to something.

Her idea isn't bad, it's just how she would have wanted to fund it that's anti-capitalist.

I read an article (and started a topic) on universal income some time ago and I forget the name of the country that was going to put it to a vote. However unlike Hillary, their universal income was going to be funded by the elimination of all social programs. Here is what they came up with:

First eliminate all social programs including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, SNAP's, SCHIP's, Food Stamps, WIC, HUD, Unemployment, all of them. Next, use that money to pay every adult $18,000 a year if I remember the figure correctly.

So now you have a tax free check of 18K every year. From that point on, it's all up to you what you want to do with it. If you can live on 18K a year plus a part-time job, go for it. Or perhaps you are married, you and your wife will receive 36K per year combined and retire. If you are younger, you can work full-time if desired and just use that money to repay a mortgage or invest. You do whatever you want with it.

If you want to have children or have more children, fine, but don't look to government for any money. You get 18K a year and that's it.

After they ran the numbers, they found it would cost the government much less money than maintaining their social programs. Plus nobody would have any reason to complain about the poor. The poor get the same as you do. If they want to have five kids, they have to support them--not us. If they want to get fat on that 18K a year instead of food stamps, fine, it's their money. They have no reason to complain about the middle-class or wealthy either. They will use their 18K checks for investments or perhaps an IRA account.

Such a system could eliminate the homeless. It would make the poor much more responsible since they would not be rewarded for irresponsible behavior as they are now. Nobody rich, poor or anything in between would have any right to complain about another social class. Every kid has a chance to attend college. We could eliminate thousands of government jobs who push paperwork and write the checks. We would save a ton of money too.

Nice theoretical application, but you know the idiots would blow their $$ on stupid shit, and will then look to government to bail them out. Then all those programs will return, one by one, until we are back where we are now, except with even more government control.

It's the same as trying to implement a national sales tax to replace the income tax. sooner or later they will want a new income tax ON TOP of the sales tax.

None of your doomsday predictions have come to pass in Alaska.

Alaska is the only place on Earth where universal basic income is a reality. It was started by Republicans in the 1970s and continues to this day.

In other countries where this concept has been tested, it has been a raging success.

In Namibia, it raised school attendance and reduced child malnutrition.

 

[g5000]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

Universal income is not supposed to be enough to live on. It is meant to supplement your income.

 

[jon_berzerk]

she didn't do it because the numbers didn't add up. thoughts?

Hillary Clinton almost ran for president on a universal basic income

The more Secretary Clinton goes on TV and promotes her wonderful election loss, people in the middle say: "Oh wow, thats why I voted Trump"

probably does add up but those who are currently living the life to the fullest on the system

would get a pay down grade

that is why she didnt do it

 

[Missouri_Mike]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

Universal income is not supposed to be enough to live on. It is meant to supplement your income.

So it's not universal income. Sounds like a Ponzi scheme.

 

[g5000]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

Universal income is not supposed to be enough to live on. It is meant to supplement your income.

So it's not universal income. Sounds like a Ponzi scheme.

It is universal in that EVERYONE receives it.

So it is most certainly universal income.

 

[miketx]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

Universal income is not supposed to be enough to live on. It is meant to supplement your income.

So it's not universal income. Sounds like a Ponzi scheme.

It is universal in that EVERYONE receives it.

So it is most certainly universal income.

Universal poverty and unemployment.

 

[g5000]

This whole idea originated with Thomas Paine. I have mentioned it often on this forum. Agrarian Justice.

 

[g5000]

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

So welfare level income. Doesn't seem to be much point in that. I mean damn if you're going to have universal income it should be better than poverty level. So what do you think? Triple that amount?

Universal income is not supposed to be enough to live on. It is meant to supplement your income.

So it's not universal income. Sounds like a Ponzi scheme.

It is universal in that EVERYONE receives it.

So it is most certainly universal income.

Universal poverty and unemployment.

You have no evidence to support your assertions.

 

[miketx]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

Never mentioning where this magic money comes from. My God are people this delusional?

 

[g5000]

How much would universal income be?

Here is what the federal government currently considers to be the poverty level:

• $12,060 for individuals
• $16,240 for a family of 2
• $20,420 for a family of 3
• $24,600 for a family of 4
• $28,780 for a family of 5
• $32,960 for a family of 6
• $37,140 for a family of 7
• $41,320 for a family of 8

Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - HealthCare.gov Glossary

Never mentioning where this magic money comes from. My God are people this delusional?

The money comes from the same place all the current welfare programs come from.