Universal Basic Income: Biden's Best Bet?

[danielpalos]

Without raising the minimum wage, we have inflation.

Try again.

Raising the minimum wage mitigates the concentration of wealth.

No, it does not. Industries in the US are having a hard enough time competing with foreign made products as it is. When you raise MW, you create a domino effect, meaning everybody's pay has to increase. That means US manufacturers only have two choices: close up their business, or move it overseas.

For industries that can't outsource or move, they increase the cost of their product or service. Guess who pays that? The rich guy never loses.

Yes, there will be slight inflation without MW increases, but huge inflation with a $15.00 per hour MW. Everything will cost much, much more because everybody is getting paid much more money.

And a lot more people will be out of work. And guess who that hits the hardest? Not the guy making 6 figures.

The same claims are made every time the minimum wage is raised, and it is horseshit every time.

Because said raises have always been minimal. Crank it up significantly, and the side effects will be worse.

Tax breaks for the raise is all that should be required. Only the right wing has no solutions only allegations they are Right for simply being on the right wing.

 

[dblack]

If UBI were presented as an alternative to other, more controlling, forms of welfare, ie if it would replace these other forms of welfare, I could get behind it. If it's just an add-on, another lever for government control of society, I'd rather not.

 

[MeBelle]

Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:

"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.

"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.

"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."

Your OP is false.

Guv Hammond was NOT a renegade.

He was smart enough to create the APFC instead of dumping all the revenue the State made from oil and mineral sales into the General Fund.

The PFD checks are cut from the REVENUE the fund creates.
The Fund also invests money in stocks, bonds, etc.

 

[MeBelle]

I'd bet the cost of living in Alaska went up by $1000 per month right after this program started.

You'd be wrong

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:

"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.

"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.

"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."

"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:

"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.

"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.

"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.

"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.

"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."

A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden

The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.

Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?

That and other sovereign wealth funds take oil and gas royalty revenue to create a perpetuity.

How do we fund the Quid Pro Quo Red Communist China Joe Free Money?
Meth Hunter Biden business deals?


More taxes - typical leftist plan - tax us to prosperity.

You don't think your beloved taxes on will get passed on to consumers darling?
If you put a one dollar tax on a gallon of gas how much does a gallon of gas go up by?
Nobody eats it honey.


And taxing wealth. The valuing of wealth would be a nightmare.


What is my family's collection of rare early Philadelphia carved furniture worth?
How do you know it exists?

Dream on

 

[Wyatt earp]

No. Dems will go down in 2022. They already failed because of their fake witch hunts.

Never underestimate Trump.
If he's in prison before November 2022, will that increase Democratic turnout or not?

So you want to be a Fascist, destroy this nation to put Trump in jail.

 

[Andylusion]

Because that system doesn't cause people to stop working. A thousand dollars a year, doesn't cause people to quit their jobs.

You pay me a $1,000 a month, and I will quit my job. Promise you I will. If you are dumb enough to pay me to not work, I'll take every dollar you are stupid enough to give me.

And when 100 Million people are living off the government, all the taxes in the world won't be enough to generate the money needed to pay them.

Result will be inflation.

A thousand bucks a month is only 12K a year. If you only lived on that, you'd be living poorly because using a 40 hour week, that's less than minimum wage.


George has the right idea in a way, but the wrong approach. Universal income could work, not by making other people give you their money, but by using it to replace all our other social programs. Look at it this way:

You get this 1K a month and continue working. That's 12K a year for a single person, and an extra 24K a year for a couple. We have millions of people who don't have health insurance in this country. An extra 12 to 24K could certainly solve that problem, even if it's not the greatest plan. Working people who want to send their kids to college will find that problem solved as well. You could put some of that extra 24K in a college fund for your kids. When they turn of age, they too will be getting 12K a year, because I think it would be stupid for kids to be getting this money until they are an adult.

Because it would replace all social programs, women wouldn't be having more kids for more government handouts. One child or five children, you only get 12K a year to take care of them. No food stamps, no HUD, no childcare, no Medicaid. The problem with these social programs is, if anybody wants to climb out of poverty or better themselves, they have to stay under a certain income to keep receiving government goodies. They work less hours or don't work at all. So UI would encourage them to work or work more hours, give them an incentive to practice birth control, and it would actually solve most of the poverty in this country.

It would end this dichotomy between the rich, middle-class and the poor. The poor and middle-class couldn't complain about the rich, and the rich couldn't complain about others being on the dole because they will be too. The downside? Because we would have no more social programs, you'd have to sock away money for retirement. You'd need money for health insurance if you were formerly on Medicaid. You'd have to get disability insurance since there would be no more disability coverage through government. Long term medical care would be needed for your elderly years since there would be no more Medicare.

Where would the money come from? We could combine all the current payroll tax contributions into one with the exception of local taxes. Keep the rates the same for income taxes.

When you think about it, UI could solve many of our generation old problems in this country: Advanced education, healthcare, homelessness, wealth jealousy, laziness, people ripping off our systems......

A thousand bucks a month is only 12K a year. If you only lived on that, you'd be living poorly because using a 40 hour week, that's less than minimum wage.

I was unemployed from the start of April, to the end of September.

During that time, I lived on less than $1,000 a month. I *LOVED* it.

Now granted, there are people who enjoy working. There are people who love their jobs. My parents loved what they did for a living. Perhaps you enjoyed your job when you were driving.

But I absolutely HATE my job. I hate it.

Why do I do it? Because you have to. You have to work, and provide goods and services to your fellow man, to get money to buy goods and services from your fellow man. You have to create value, to get value in exchange.

But if I didn't have to work to get $1,000 a month? I would most certainly not work.
And I know many people who wouldn't work, if you paid them to stay home.

And sure that $24,000 would be fantastic for the upper middle class, and the rich. They would love to send their kids to college, and have health care, paid for by the tax payers.

But the people in my income group, I guarantee you a bunch would be out on a lake fishing, or watching netflix, or doing something else. I know, because they have told me as much. I've had people who said they wish they had been laid off like I was, so they could stay at home all summer, collecting money from the tax payer.

And can say for myself... that if I knew unemployment compensation would not run out.... I would not be working right now. Guarantee it. Guarantee it. I still remember how miserable I when they sent me notice that I was hired. Worst day this whole year, only comparable to the last month of working at this miserable hell hole of a job.

You pay me to stay home... I'll live off the public for as long as you are willing to pay me to do so.

It would end this dichotomy between the rich, middle-class and the poor. The poor and middle-class couldn't complain about the rich, and the rich couldn't complain about others being on the dole because they will be too.

Oh no... no no no. You know that as long as we've known each other on this forum, I'm usually backing everything you say, but on this I disagree.

The dichotomy between rich and poor has nothing to do with the economic system, or benefits, or government programs. It has to do with two things.... A: The evil greed and envy of others, that is wrapped up in the human heart. B: The political class that stands to benefit from stirring up that greed and envy.

The lower and middle class will always complain about the rich, as long as the rich exist at all. No matter how good they have it, no matter what services you provide, no matter what benefits they get, the lower and middle class will hate the rich, because that is the greed and envy that is in their hearts.

And the political class, mostly Democrats use the power of government to stir up that greed and envy, for political gain. The Democrats specifically will never allow the strife caused by greed and envy to die down, because it is the primary motivation for all of their supporters to vote Democrat.

And you can see this in places like Venezuela. Venezuela has driven out the rich almost entirely. They almost don't have an upper class anymore, because they have all moved to Spain, and Brazil, and Columbia, and the US.

Yet what do you hear from Maduro the president? The rich! The Wealthy! They are to blame! It hasn't changed, even with all the companies having left Venezuela.

So I am convinced that no amount of anything you give to the poor and middle class, will change the greedy and envy driven politics and ideology. My evidence for that, is that I've been to Europe, and as I have said numerous times, the middle class of most of Europe, could only dream of the life style that lower class people in this country enjoy.

The lower class in this country, has it better, than almost anywhere in the world. In fact some have a life, that the upper middle class in other countries, couldn't dream of.

Yet they still sit around hating people who have more, and the politicians stoke that, and stir that up, and gain political power using that evil greed and envy in their hearts.

So, I respectfully disagree with you on that one point. It won't stop the class warfare for as long as people have greed and envy in their hearts. We need a reformation of morals, not a new government program.

 

[Andylusion]

We should have no homeless problem in our first world economy. The right wing has nothing but ad hominems not any fine capital solutions at lower cost but still want to be taken seriously about Capitalism outside of Socialism threads.

For the last twenty five years the major park in my neighborhood has been off-limits to homeless tents. In the last two months the number of tents has proliferated to such an extent it is looking very likely the tents may be here to stay (at least until the MAGA-virus (magically) disappears. It is widely believed homelessness will increase dramatically next winter. Too much winning

I don't get it. How has Trump, or anyone on the right-wing, caused democrat run states, or democrat run cities, or democrat policies, created homelessness?

What policy exactly, do you think causes homelessness?

 

[MeBelle]

"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.'


As a former Alaskan who lived more than half of my life there:

There ARE forms to fill out.
There IS a means test (too generous in my opinion)
It is NOT free money - Fed taxes have to be paid.

The PFD also keeps Alaska from imposing a State tax which was repealed in 1980 (iirc)
Imagine that! A State repealing state taxes!!

 

[MeBelle]

I'd bet the cost of living in Alaska went up by $1000 per month right after this program started.

That hasn't been the case according to this source:
I think inflation results when too many dollars chase too few goods; UBI dollars would be spent freely into local economies at a time when they are desperately needed.

Evidence and More Evidence of the Effect on Inflation of Free Money

"If inflation is a direct result of giving free money to everyone, we should see the CPI of Alaska begin to rise faster than the CPI of the rest of the country starting in 1982.

"So what did happen?

"Ever since 1982 Alaska has had LOWER inflation than the entire U.S."

More oil

Repeal of Alaska's state income tax?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A thousand bucks a month is only 12K a year. If you only lived on that, you'd be living poorly because using a 40 hour week, that's less than minimum wage.

I was unemployed from the start of April, to the end of September.

During that time, I lived on less than $1,000 a month. I *LOVED* it.

Now granted, there are people who enjoy working. There are people who love their jobs. My parents loved what they did for a living. Perhaps you enjoyed your job when you were driving.

But I absolutely HATE my job. I hate it.

Why do I do it? Because you have to. You have to work, and provide goods and services to your fellow man, to get money to buy goods and services from your fellow man. You have to create value, to get value in exchange.

But if I didn't have to work to get $1,000 a month? I would most certainly not work.
And I know many people who wouldn't work, if you paid them to stay home.

And sure that $24,000 would be fantastic for the upper middle class, and the rich. They would love to send their kids to college, and have health care, paid for by the tax payers.

But the people in my income group, I guarantee you a bunch would be out on a lake fishing, or watching netflix, or doing something else. I know, because they have told me as much. I've had people who said they wish they had been laid off like I was, so they could stay at home all summer, collecting money from the tax payer.

And can say for myself... that if I knew unemployment compensation would not run out.... I would not be working right now. Guarantee it. Guarantee it. I still remember how miserable I when they sent me notice that I was hired. Worst day this whole year, only comparable to the last month of working at this miserable hell hole of a job.

You pay me to stay home... I'll live off the public for as long as you are willing to pay me to do so.

It would end this dichotomy between the rich, middle-class and the poor. The poor and middle-class couldn't complain about the rich, and the rich couldn't complain about others being on the dole because they will be too.

Oh no... no no no. You know that as long as we've known each other on this forum, I'm usually backing everything you say, but on this I disagree.

The dichotomy between rich and poor has nothing to do with the economic system, or benefits, or government programs. It has to do with two things.... A: The evil greed and envy of others, that is wrapped up in the human heart. B: The political class that stands to benefit from stirring up that greed and envy.

The lower and middle class will always complain about the rich, as long as the rich exist at all. No matter how good they have it, no matter what services you provide, no matter what benefits they get, the lower and middle class will hate the rich, because that is the greed and envy that is in their hearts.

And the political class, mostly Democrats use the power of government to stir up that greed and envy, for political gain. The Democrats specifically will never allow the strife caused by greed and envy to die down, because it is the primary motivation for all of their supporters to vote Democrat.

And you can see this in places like Venezuela. Venezuela has driven out the rich almost entirely. They almost don't have an upper class anymore, because they have all moved to Spain, and Brazil, and Columbia, and the US.

Yet what do you hear from Maduro the president? The rich! The Wealthy! They are to blame! It hasn't changed, even with all the companies having left Venezuela.

So I am convinced that no amount of anything you give to the poor and middle class, will change the greedy and envy driven politics and ideology. My evidence for that, is that I've been to Europe, and as I have said numerous times, the middle class of most of Europe, could only dream of the life style that lower class people in this country enjoy.

The lower class in this country, has it better, than almost anywhere in the world. In fact some have a life, that the upper middle class in other countries, couldn't dream of.

Yet they still sit around hating people who have more, and the politicians stoke that, and stir that up, and gain political power using that evil greed and envy in their hearts.

So, I respectfully disagree with you on that one point. It won't stop the class warfare for as long as people have greed and envy in their hearts. We need a reformation of morals, not a new government program.

It might not stop the hatred of wealthy people, but they'd sure have less to complain about. In spite of my career choice, I still hated to work. Like you, I felt I was contributing to society and benefiting myself at the same time; trying to get ahead. After all, without people who do my job, how would your products get to the store for you to buy?

A nice vacation on taxpayer dime is nice. I did it once in my life before being put on disability. But knowing that it's temporary is what makes it so valuable. If you knew it was going to be that way for the rest of your life, you might have a different view about it.

If UI happened 20 years ago, I could have been so much further ahead in my life than I am now. Never married or had kids. Have real estate investments I made nearly 30 years ago. And if not for my health, would still be working today and would have made more investments; perhaps bought more rental properties. Advancing in life is contagious even if you hate working as much as we do.

I think it's one of those situations you have to be in before you actually understand the realities of it. While working, my dream was to payoff my mortgages so I didn't have to work except for myself. Now that I'm actually in a similar situation, to some degree, I miss doing other things besides staying at home. I've been out of work for a little more than a year, and I still constantly dream about being at work no matter how hard I try to stop those dreams.

However even if you did what you said you'd do, I think a lot of people would not with UI. I think a lot of people go through life feeling there is no way for them to advance. You work, get a paycheck, pay the bills, and hopefully have some left over for a big mack combo at the end of the week. With additional income, it would give people some hope they have the ability to make those advancements they always wanted to make.

I guess the only way to know is if we actually did it.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:

"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.

"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.

"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."

"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:

"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.

"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.

"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.

"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.

"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."

A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden

The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.

Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?

What if someone doesnt want to work, but still wants the basic income? Why should other people work then?

They want to give free college, but why go to college if you get a basic income, sounds like a waste of time to get educated for nothing.....

Greed is good for some; we have a Commerce Clause; some people may not want be Poor under our form of Capitalism.

A lot of people don’t want to be fat or ugly. Yet here you are. Do we run a nation on your not wanting to be what you are?

I could be more greedy and work on Wallstreet to be able to afford cosmetic surgery.

There’s nothing more greedy than wanting something from someone else’s work. And nothing more vile than wanting the government to steal it for you.

Not the left wing's fault the right wing has no fine capital solutions only Hoax. Capitalism, what is That sayeth the Right Wing in all threads but socialism threads.

I’m not sure exactly WTF you’re saying here. Have you lost your train of thought? Or are you just out of ways to say you aren’t a piece of shit for being a thief and a worthless sack of shit?

 

[Andylusion]

A thousand bucks a month is only 12K a year. If you only lived on that, you'd be living poorly because using a 40 hour week, that's less than minimum wage.

I was unemployed from the start of April, to the end of September.

During that time, I lived on less than $1,000 a month. I *LOVED* it.

Now granted, there are people who enjoy working. There are people who love their jobs. My parents loved what they did for a living. Perhaps you enjoyed your job when you were driving.

But I absolutely HATE my job. I hate it.

Why do I do it? Because you have to. You have to work, and provide goods and services to your fellow man, to get money to buy goods and services from your fellow man. You have to create value, to get value in exchange.

But if I didn't have to work to get $1,000 a month? I would most certainly not work.
And I know many people who wouldn't work, if you paid them to stay home.

And sure that $24,000 would be fantastic for the upper middle class, and the rich. They would love to send their kids to college, and have health care, paid for by the tax payers.

But the people in my income group, I guarantee you a bunch would be out on a lake fishing, or watching netflix, or doing something else. I know, because they have told me as much. I've had people who said they wish they had been laid off like I was, so they could stay at home all summer, collecting money from the tax payer.

And can say for myself... that if I knew unemployment compensation would not run out.... I would not be working right now. Guarantee it. Guarantee it. I still remember how miserable I when they sent me notice that I was hired. Worst day this whole year, only comparable to the last month of working at this miserable hell hole of a job.

You pay me to stay home... I'll live off the public for as long as you are willing to pay me to do so.

It would end this dichotomy between the rich, middle-class and the poor. The poor and middle-class couldn't complain about the rich, and the rich couldn't complain about others being on the dole because they will be too.

Oh no... no no no. You know that as long as we've known each other on this forum, I'm usually backing everything you say, but on this I disagree.

The dichotomy between rich and poor has nothing to do with the economic system, or benefits, or government programs. It has to do with two things.... A: The evil greed and envy of others, that is wrapped up in the human heart. B: The political class that stands to benefit from stirring up that greed and envy.

The lower and middle class will always complain about the rich, as long as the rich exist at all. No matter how good they have it, no matter what services you provide, no matter what benefits they get, the lower and middle class will hate the rich, because that is the greed and envy that is in their hearts.

And the political class, mostly Democrats use the power of government to stir up that greed and envy, for political gain. The Democrats specifically will never allow the strife caused by greed and envy to die down, because it is the primary motivation for all of their supporters to vote Democrat.

And you can see this in places like Venezuela. Venezuela has driven out the rich almost entirely. They almost don't have an upper class anymore, because they have all moved to Spain, and Brazil, and Columbia, and the US.

Yet what do you hear from Maduro the president? The rich! The Wealthy! They are to blame! It hasn't changed, even with all the companies having left Venezuela.

So I am convinced that no amount of anything you give to the poor and middle class, will change the greedy and envy driven politics and ideology. My evidence for that, is that I've been to Europe, and as I have said numerous times, the middle class of most of Europe, could only dream of the life style that lower class people in this country enjoy.

The lower class in this country, has it better, than almost anywhere in the world. In fact some have a life, that the upper middle class in other countries, couldn't dream of.

Yet they still sit around hating people who have more, and the politicians stoke that, and stir that up, and gain political power using that evil greed and envy in their hearts.

So, I respectfully disagree with you on that one point. It won't stop the class warfare for as long as people have greed and envy in their hearts. We need a reformation of morals, not a new government program.

It might not stop the hatred of wealthy people, but they'd sure have less to complain about. In spite of my career choice, I still hated to work. Like you, I felt I was contributing to society and benefiting myself at the same time; trying to get ahead. After all, without people who do my job, how would your products get to the store for you to buy?

A nice vacation on taxpayer dime is nice. I did it once in my life before being put on disability. But knowing that it's temporary is what makes it so valuable. If you knew it was going to be that way for the rest of your life, you might have a different view about it.

If UI happened 20 years ago, I could have been so much further ahead in my life than I am now. Never married or had kids. Have real estate investments I made nearly 30 years ago. And if not for my health, would still be working today and would have made more investments; perhaps bought more rental properties. Advancing in life is contagious even if you hate working as much as we do.

I think it's one of those situations you have to be in before you actually understand the realities of it. While working, my dream was to payoff my mortgages so I didn't have to work except for myself. Now that I'm actually in a similar situation, to some degree, I miss doing other things besides staying at home. I've been out of work for a little more than a year, and I still constantly dream about being at work no matter how hard I try to stop those dreams.

However even if you did what you said you'd do, I think a lot of people would not with UI. I think a lot of people go through life feeling there is no way for them to advance. You work, get a paycheck, pay the bills, and hopefully have some left over for a big mack combo at the end of the week. With additional income, it would give people some hope they have the ability to make those advancements they always wanted to make.

I guess the only way to know is if we actually did it.

If you knew it was going to be that way for the rest of your life, you might have a different view about it.

Um... I don't think so. I used to be that way, because I thought I would find something at some point, that I would succeed in, and find rewarding.

Now.... no, not so much. Especially since I know of people who have spent most of their life living off the government, and never felt like they wanted to 'contribute to society'.

If people pay me to stay home, I'll stay home forever. I'm not worried about who will being the products I buy, because if that ever becomes a problem, it will be a problem for everyone else too, so that will fix itself, won't it?

Now that I'm actually in a similar situation, to some degree, I miss doing other things besides staying at home. I've been out of work for a little more than a year, and I still constantly dream about being at work no matter how hard I try to stop those dreams.

It's a strange fact of human existence, that I don't understand.... that when you must do something... you hate what you must do.... but if you actually can't do something.... then magically you want to do that something, simply because you can't do it.... even if before you hated it.

I don't understand humans at all, even though I am technically one of them.

You work, get a paycheck, pay the bills, and hopefully have some left over for a big mack combo at the end of the week. With additional income, it would give people some hope they have the ability to make those advancements they always wanted to make.

I've heard that before. Because I've never met someone who said "I have enough". Everyone, everywhere, says they need more.

No one says, "nah I'm good.".

Everyone says "if only I had a little more". and the reason they say that, is because every single time they get a little more, they spend more. They get a raise, and instead of having that savings, or using it to get those advancements they always wanted..... they instead get 3 big mack combos, and wonder why they are still poor.

I've known people who earned literally double my income, and had less cash on hand than I do. Which is mind blowing to me, because I can't even think of what I would spend it on.

That's why I'm skeptical that it would actually improve anything. I think people would just blow another $24,000 a year in crap, and still remain with no savings, living pay check to pay check, wondering why their lives suck, and blaming the rich.

It's like watching the 2008 Occupy Wall St protests, where you have a bunch of spoiled brat Yuppie kids, living a luxury life, screaming at Wall Street bankers. They have time to video stream on their unlimited data plans, with their $1,000 smart phones, about how oppressed they are by the corporations that made the tents they were in, and name brand clothing they wore.... and have the nerve to whine they are in debt.

That's kind of what I think would happen if you started handing out $1,000 per month to people. They would blow it all, just like OWS people, and cry about how oppressed they are.

Nice thought though.... but I'm skeptical.

 

[hadit]

They want to give free college, but why go to college if you get a basic income, sounds like a waste of time to get educated for nothing.....

I don't think many Americans would be content to live on their UBI stipend. Such a supplement might prevent a few medical bankruptcies, but I doubt if it produces a new US leisure class.

As far as education's concerned, understanding the world you live in has a value that far exceeds how much money you can exchange for your daily toil.

I believe we should solve simple poverty by solving for the deleterious effects of Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in an at-will employment State. How much more market friendly can it get, with automatic stabilization of our economy?

Will you for once be honest and accurate with your language and state that you think we can solve poverty with welfare for people who don't want to provide for themselves? That's what you really mean when say dumb things like "simply being unemployed in an at-will employment State". You know that covers those who can work and who have available jobs but refuse to work. They are poor through their own choices and can take steps to become self-sufficient, but refuse to do so. Why should society perpetuate a negative set of actions by subsidizing them?

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment regardless. And, providing for the general welfare means solving for simple poverty.

Are you going to stop saying that welfare is UC?

UC falls under providing for the general welfare; that is why You are confused, right winger.

No, it does not. UC provides temporary assistance to workers laid off from their jobs until they find another one. It's not welfare, it's not universal, it's not permanent. Tell you what, cite the SC decision that states it falls under general welfare.

 

[hadit]

Think of the opportunity cost of taking an additional 4 trillion out of the economy.

Where are we taking the $4 trillion from?

Would you sacrifice 4 trillion dollars from Wall Street speculators, FIRE sector shareholders, and the Pentagon in order to gain an equal amount of consumption and investment?

Monopoly Capital - Wikipedia

"Fourth, military spending does not compete with capitalist interests in the same way as civilian spending and through imperialism serves to enhance those interests.

"Therefore, military spending is able to expand to a degree civilian spending is not, providing an important outlet for surplus absorption."

The problem is we have no general warfare clause in our federal Constitution and we should be promoting the general welfare not the general warfare every time it comes up.

And, I agree to disagree that military spending is better than infrastructure spending as a Government means of production.

But we do have a Constitutional mandate for defense. You want to deny that one while taking to ridiculous extremes the welfare clause.

lol. Our Constitutional mandate for the general Welfare is first not second.

Irrelevant. The constitutional mandate for defense is as absolute as the welfare clause.

Yes, and our welfare clause is general not common.

Again, irrelevant. You want to take the one to extremes while ignoring the other.

A general power outranks a common power every time it comes up.

Which SC decision states that?

 

[hadit]

Let's see if we can translate: You want wages to just continually rise, which is inflation because you're not doing anything to increase the value of the jobs

Productivity has also risen. Inflation happens regardless. The minimum wage should have kept up with inflation from Inception.

Does the burger flipper of today flip more burgers than the burger flipper of yesterday, or does he do about the same number? Does the floor sweeper sweep more floors today or about the same amount of square footage in a normal shift? Does the Wal-Mart greeter greet more people today than before? The productivity you're talking about is from automation. For example, you don't have thousands of men on an auto assembly line welding pieces together and turning bolts, you have a comparative handful monitoring machines that do a better job welding and putting on bolts. A worker has to learn new skills to operate the automated machines, which in turn means he doesn't get paid MW any more. So, since you brought it up, what MW jobs have seen increased productivity that would justify higher wages? Be specific.

Valuation just like the CEO is what matters.

What jobs? Be specific.

If the CEO gets compensated due to valuation why the difference for labor? Productivity has gone up.

The CEO is more responsible for productivity going up because he directs the company to invest in automation. Now, what MW jobs are driving higher productivity?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Now.... no, not so much. Especially since I know of people who have spent most of their life living off the government, and never felt like they wanted to 'contribute to society'.

Perhaps, but I sense a strong conservative quality in you. I would believe the people you spoke with have no or few conservative values within them.

Without a doubt there are people who are happy living in a roach infested shack and satisfied because they don't have to work to live that way. But at least what you've said here, your income would double with UI. Then the choice you would have to make is whether you are satisfied living the way you are and not working, or use the opportunity to do much better, but only be able to accomplish that by continuing your employment.

Life is uncertain, that's for sure. Living paycheck to paycheck works for now, but may be a disaster for you in your later years. I know many people don't consider a time when they cannot work, government won't help, and you end up under a bridge somewhere. But if you have the slightest inclination of looking forward, you may opt to never be in that position if such an opportunity presented itself like UI.

I've heard that before. Because I've never met someone who said "I have enough". Everyone, everywhere, says they need more.

No one says, "nah I'm good.".

I've known people who have. I have several relatives in my family. Don't get me wrong, there is no such thing as enough money for most people, but there are enough people who do have enough to live comfortably and work anyway.

In my last job, we had several people who worked for government and earned them a nice early retirement with a great pension. When I asked them why they are still working for our place, they tell me they are board, or their wives still work and they feel guilty about them still working while they sit at home. They don't need the money, but the money certainly doesn't hurt.

Everyone says "if only I had a little more". and the reason they say that, is because every single time they get a little more, they spend more. They get a raise, and instead of having that savings, or using it to get those advancements they always wanted..... they instead get 3 big mack combos, and wonder why they are still poor.

I've known people who earned literally double my income, and had less cash on hand than I do. Which is mind blowing to me, because I can't even think of what I would spend it on.

That's why I'm skeptical that it would actually improve anything. I think people would just blow another $24,000 a year in crap, and still remain with no savings, living pay check to pay check, wondering why their lives suck, and blaming the rich.

This is true. Not everybody will be responsible with much more additional income. Books have been written about lottery winners who's luck ended up being the worst thing that ever happened in their life. They went from poor to rich, an to be even poorer, while losing a lot of lifelong friends along the way.

Small increments of additional income would be wasted because usually those pay increases only cover the cost of living they lost out on prior. However a huge increase in income would prove to be beneficial to a lot of other people. It would all depend on the individual.

 

[Oldestyle]

Higher paid labor creates more in demand and generates more in tax revenue. A positive multiplier applies.

Higher paid labor creates greater employment costs which are addressed by raising consumer prices and eliminating jobs.

What ratio of employees can a given employer afford to disemploy before it affects productivity?

A person earning fifteen dollars an hour generates around nine times the federal income tax a person on the current federal minimum wage does now.

And how much Federal Income Tax does a person generate who's been laid off from his job, Daniel? Duh?

 

[danielpalos]

We should have no homeless problem in our first world economy. The right wing has nothing but ad hominems not any fine capital solutions at lower cost but still want to be taken seriously about Capitalism outside of Socialism threads.

For the last twenty five years the major park in my neighborhood has been off-limits to homeless tents. In the last two months the number of tents has proliferated to such an extent it is looking very likely the tents may be here to stay (at least until the MAGA-virus (magically) disappears. It is widely believed homelessness will increase dramatically next winter. Too much winning

I don't get it. How has Trump, or anyone on the right-wing, caused democrat run states, or democrat run cities, or democrat policies, created homelessness?

What policy exactly, do you think causes homelessness?

Right wing tax cut economics ensures Government is perpetually underfunded.

The Great Eliminator: How Ronald Reagan Made Homelessness Permanent

At Christmastime 1982, fed-up religious leaders called a press conference. The Rev. Paul Moore, New York City's Episcopal bishop, was furious. Standing next to…

www.sfweekly.com

 

[danielpalos]

"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.'


As a former Alaskan who lived more than half of my life there:

There ARE forms to fill out.
There IS a means test (too generous in my opinion)
It is NOT free money - Fed taxes have to be paid.

The PFD also keeps Alaska from imposing a State tax which was repealed in 1980 (iirc)
Imagine that! A State repealing state taxes!!

Why didn't that socialism work in Venezuela?