Universal Basic Income: Biden's Best Bet?

[danielpalos]

what is ".....EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS...." ?????

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

oh---you mean "equal protection under the law"-----yes----VERY IMPORTANT------have you ever been to court on a life, liberty, or property question. I have.
THEIR AIN'T NONE (the 'equal' thing) Court decisions regarding "life, liberty, property" are
POLITICAL in my town-----increasingly.

Daniel believes that he's not getting equal protection under the law because Unemployment Compensation doesn't cover people who simply refuse to work a job. He thinks the word "Unemployment" means unemployed for any reason at all. And you will never convince him otherwise.

Basically, he insists UC is really a welfare program that covers everyone and can't figure out why no checks ever show up in the mail.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unequal protection of the laws only creates more poverty for right wingers to complain about when having to pay for general welfare spending on the Poor. And, UC is not a welfare program but a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. An automatic stabilizer for our economy.

You claim UC has to cover those who refuse to work a job because of "unequal protection under the law". That's bogus, and until you admit that, you're going no further.

Also, you repeating endlessly that "Employment is at the will of either party" is totally meaningless, totally. Literally, it means nothing in this context, so you need to stop saying it.

You are welcome to your currently unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[danielpalos]

328 million Americans * $1,000/month = $328 billion/month.
$328 billion/month * 12 months = $3.9 trillion/year.

Fun times indeed. Where is the almost $4 trillion going to come from, Bill Gates?

That's McConnell's response that kills the whole thing.

No one can make it on $1000 a month. The minimum should be $2000, and it would require price controls.

That would be $8T a year.

They print all the money they need already, at this point we just need electrons to fill the bank accounts. That's all "money" is at this point anyway. "Digits", it's not based on anything real or tangible. So just program the treasury computers to fill every American's account with $500 a week and let people who can work earn a little bit more.

It's not that hard.

It's also not that hard to see the effects of doing that. Hyper-inflation is inevitable, because all you're doing is progressively making the dollar worth less and less.

Answer this question honestly. Why don't we just set the minimum wage at $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether? If you do, you might begin to realize why simply creating more money doesn't translate into more wealth.

How did QE work?

It provided a temporary boost to the economy designed to head off catastrophic collapse. It cannot continue for very long without causing the problem I described. Now, since you chimed in you can also answer the question. Why don't we just set the minimum wage at $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether?

Right wingers have a problem with it because the Poor may benefit.

 

[irosie91]

what is ".....EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS...." ?????

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

oh---you mean "equal protection under the law"-----yes----VERY IMPORTANT------have you ever been to court on a life, liberty, or property question. I have.
THEIR AIN'T NONE (the 'equal' thing) Court decisions regarding "life, liberty, property" are
POLITICAL in my town-----increasingly.

Daniel believes that he's not getting equal protection under the law because Unemployment Compensation doesn't cover people who simply refuse to work a job. He thinks the word "Unemployment" means unemployed for any reason at all. And you will never convince him otherwise.

Basically, he insists UC is really a welfare program that covers everyone and can't figure out why no checks ever show up in the mail.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unequal protection of the laws only creates more poverty for right wingers to complain about when having to pay for general welfare spending on the Poor. And, UC is not a welfare program but a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. An automatic stabilizer for our economy.

You claim UC has to cover those who refuse to work a job because of "unequal protection under the law". That's bogus, and until you admit that, you're going no further.

Also, you repeating endlessly that "Employment is at the will of either party" is totally meaningless, totally. Literally, it means nothing in this context, so you need to stop saying it.

You are welcome to your currently unsubstantiated opinion.

is your model----"work as volunteer" alongside
"universal standard income" SUBSTANTIATED as
a feasible?

 

[KarlMarxsPitBull]

Right wingers have a problem with it because the Poor may benefit.

True, and rich democrats undermined the best chance we had to establish a universal income in this time of economic crisis by ramping up phony impeachments and investigations that they knew had no hope of going anywhere. Hopefully the progressive wing gets a solid grasp of power so that these democrats who get bought by billionaire donors start actually taxing their masters for the benefit of the people.

 

[danielpalos]

what is ".....EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS...." ?????

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

oh---you mean "equal protection under the law"-----yes----VERY IMPORTANT------have you ever been to court on a life, liberty, or property question. I have.
THEIR AIN'T NONE (the 'equal' thing) Court decisions regarding "life, liberty, property" are
POLITICAL in my town-----increasingly.

Daniel believes that he's not getting equal protection under the law because Unemployment Compensation doesn't cover people who simply refuse to work a job. He thinks the word "Unemployment" means unemployed for any reason at all. And you will never convince him otherwise.

Basically, he insists UC is really a welfare program that covers everyone and can't figure out why no checks ever show up in the mail.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unequal protection of the laws only creates more poverty for right wingers to complain about when having to pay for general welfare spending on the Poor. And, UC is not a welfare program but a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. An automatic stabilizer for our economy.

You claim UC has to cover those who refuse to work a job because of "unequal protection under the law". That's bogus, and until you admit that, you're going no further.

Also, you repeating endlessly that "Employment is at the will of either party" is totally meaningless, totally. Literally, it means nothing in this context, so you need to stop saying it.

You are welcome to your currently unsubstantiated opinion.

is your model----"work as volunteer" alongside
"universal standard income" SUBSTANTIATED as
a feasible?

lol. Equal protection of the law must be made feasible in both law and equity.

 

[danielpalos]

Right wingers have a problem with it because the Poor may benefit.

True, and rich democrats undermined the best chance we had to establish a universal income in this time of economic crisis by ramping up phony impeachments and investigations that they knew had no hope of going anywhere. Hopefully the progressive wing gets a solid grasp of power so that these democrats who get bought by billionaire donors start actually taxing their masters for the benefit of the people.

Solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure is more economically efficient.

 

[dudmuck]

The underlying theme I see here simply is another give away, all solved by "tax the wealthy"....

College? = Tax the rich
Housing? = Tax the rich
Poverty? = Tax the rich
Food insecurity? = Tax the rich
Unemployment? = Tax the rich
etc, etc, etc....

Socialism is great until you run out of other peoples money....Margret Thatcher.

 

[KarlMarxsPitBull]

The funny part is the proles hoarded toilet paper as if the corona virus gave people the shits, rather than a slight cold.

It would have made more sense to hoard Vick's Vapo Rub. That's why people need strong individual leaders rather than these legislatures full of insufferably weak political stooges.

 

[hadit]

what is ".....EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS...." ?????

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

oh---you mean "equal protection under the law"-----yes----VERY IMPORTANT------have you ever been to court on a life, liberty, or property question. I have.
THEIR AIN'T NONE (the 'equal' thing) Court decisions regarding "life, liberty, property" are
POLITICAL in my town-----increasingly.

Daniel believes that he's not getting equal protection under the law because Unemployment Compensation doesn't cover people who simply refuse to work a job. He thinks the word "Unemployment" means unemployed for any reason at all. And you will never convince him otherwise.

Basically, he insists UC is really a welfare program that covers everyone and can't figure out why no checks ever show up in the mail.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unequal protection of the laws only creates more poverty for right wingers to complain about when having to pay for general welfare spending on the Poor. And, UC is not a welfare program but a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. An automatic stabilizer for our economy.

You claim UC has to cover those who refuse to work a job because of "unequal protection under the law". That's bogus, and until you admit that, you're going no further.

Also, you repeating endlessly that "Employment is at the will of either party" is totally meaningless, totally. Literally, it means nothing in this context, so you need to stop saying it.

You are welcome to your currently unsubstantiated opinion.

My opinion is substantiated by the language of the bills authorizing UC and the court cases surrounding it. You, OTOH, have nothing more than your poor understanding of some things in the Constitution that you twist bizarrely in an attempt to apply them where they don't.

 

[PredFan]

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?

There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.

Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.

“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence in most of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.

 

[danielpalos]

what is ".....EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS...." ?????

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

oh---you mean "equal protection under the law"-----yes----VERY IMPORTANT------have you ever been to court on a life, liberty, or property question. I have.
THEIR AIN'T NONE (the 'equal' thing) Court decisions regarding "life, liberty, property" are
POLITICAL in my town-----increasingly.

Daniel believes that he's not getting equal protection under the law because Unemployment Compensation doesn't cover people who simply refuse to work a job. He thinks the word "Unemployment" means unemployed for any reason at all. And you will never convince him otherwise.

Basically, he insists UC is really a welfare program that covers everyone and can't figure out why no checks ever show up in the mail.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unequal protection of the laws only creates more poverty for right wingers to complain about when having to pay for general welfare spending on the Poor. And, UC is not a welfare program but a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. An automatic stabilizer for our economy.

You claim UC has to cover those who refuse to work a job because of "unequal protection under the law". That's bogus, and until you admit that, you're going no further.

Also, you repeating endlessly that "Employment is at the will of either party" is totally meaningless, totally. Literally, it means nothing in this context, so you need to stop saying it.

You are welcome to your currently unsubstantiated opinion.

My opinion is substantiated by the language of the bills authorizing UC and the court cases surrounding it. You, OTOH, have nothing more than your poor understanding of some things in the Constitution that you twist bizarrely in an attempt to apply them where they don't.

lol. You need the "gospel Truth" not right wing fantasy. All you have is right wing fantasy not any understanding of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.

Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.

“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence innody of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.

Means nothing, Labor has to be able to afford our first world economy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So how much do you suppose you'll be paying for gasoline, natural gas, or propane for your home with a fossil fuel tax? Providers pass down all their costs to us.

Fossil fuel fortunes have come into existence through subsidies and other forms of government intervention in "free markets." The sooner gas, coal, and oil are taxed into extinction, the better, imho:

Fact Sheet: Fossil Fuel Subsidies: A Closer Look at Tax Breaks and Societal Costs - OurEnergyPolicy

"There is a long history of government intervention in energy markets. Numerous energy subsidies exist in the U.S. tax code to promote or subsidize the production of cheap and abundant fossil energy.

"Some of these subsidies have been around for a century, and while the United States has enjoyed unparalleled economic growth over the past 100 years—thanks in no small part to cheap energy—in many cases, the circumstances relevant at the time subsidies were implemented no longer exist.

"Today, the domestic fossil fuel industries (namely, coal, oil and natural gas) are mature and generally highly profitable.

"Additionally, numerous clean and renewable alternatives exist, which have become increasingly price-competitive with traditional fossil fuels."

Fossil fuel fortunes have come into existence through subsidies and other forms of government intervention in "free markets."

Write-offs of typical business expenses aren't subsidies.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's look at financial transactions. What transactions do you speak of? Last time DumBama messed with that, he created policy that credit card companies could no longer lay heavy fines and increased interest rates for their Democrat.....

When Wall Street banks borrow from the Fed at less than 1% rates and then loan those funds to consumers at 27%, I'm more concerned with restoring some semblance of consumer protection than with transfer balance fees.

Citigroup Has Made a Sap of the Fed: It’s Borrowing at 0.35 % from the Fed While Charging Struggling Consumers 27.4 % on Credit Cards

When Wall Street banks borrow from the Fed at less than 1% rates

How much are they borrowing at less than 1%? For how long?

You know the discount window currently lends at 0.25%

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=y9ga

So what?

FRB: H.4.1 Release-- Factors Affecting Reserve Balances -- Thursday, November 19, 2020 (federalreserve.gov)

It's such an awesome deal that banks are currently borrowing a whopping $2.188 billion.

You know what we call that in the world of finance? YAWN.........

 

[Crepitus]

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?

There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.

Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.

“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence in most of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.

No. You want to see a real example of of a rising tide lifting all boats? Start at the bottom.

 

[KarlMarxsPitBull]

“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence in most of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.

Actually that's true. That's why we need to allow the UN to assume control of global governance and create a welfare system that uplifts the poorest people around the world so that they can also drive cars, have heating and A/C, more than enough food, fashionable clothing, internet and phones and reasonable structures for shelter. It is a crime against humanity that the US exists on the backs of the world's poor.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.

Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.

“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence in most of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It is a crime against humanity that the US exists on the backs of the world's poor.

How do we do that? Be specific.

 

[KarlMarxsPitBull]

It is a crime against humanity that the US exists on the backs of the world's poor.

How do we do that? Be specific.

The US exploits the poorest workers of the world who toil in highly toxic environments making textiles and disposable products for beneath slavery wages. Imperialist corporations prop up corrupt "democracies" and despotic regimes that allow them to rape the planet of resources.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It is a crime against humanity that the US exists on the backs of the world's poor.

How do we do that? Be specific.

The US exploits the poorest workers of the world who toil in highly toxic environments making textiles and disposable products for beneath slavery wages. Imperialist corporations prop up corrupt "democracies" and despotic regimes that allow them to rape the planet of resources.

The US exploits the poorest workers of the world who toil in highly toxic environments making textiles and disposable products for beneath slavery wages.

Why do they work for us in toxic environments for beneath slavery wages?