Universal Basic Income: Biden's Best Bet?

[hadit]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

 

[danielpalos]

Free market capitalism and full employment of capital resources is the return on that promotion of the general welfare investment.

When productive capitalism gives way to monopoly capitalism, a new brand of parasite is born:

MR Online | Notes on Marx’s “General Law of Capitalist Accumulation”

"Before long, too, the system breeds a new species: Marx labels them 'a new financial aristocracy, a new variety of parasites in the shape of promoters, speculators and nominal directors, a whole system of swindling and cheating by means of corporation promotion, stock issuance, and stock speculation.'

"Could Marx be talking about us?

"By God yes.

"Nowadays, we know these people by name, by sleazy reputation; we know, too, that within the overall accumulation process this new financial aristocracy has a stake very different to that of productive capital’s."

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment to solve simple poverty is economics not political philosophy.

 

[The Original Tree]

This is the trolliest Troll thread ever.

There is no need for UBI or Student Debt Forgiveness. UN Policies state we have to depopulate The Earth by 6 Billion and Biden is their man if he assumes the throne.

No need to implement any of his promises.

There is no need for that because everyone will be getting a draft card for WWIII. Biden and his friends have promised a war, and you are going to get a war right in The Middle East against Russia, Turkey, and Iran.

You dummies voted for a "Free Shit Card" and you are getting a Draft Card! You will get free boots, free bullets, free uniforms, and the freedom to die for the New World Order.

Morons.

 

[danielpalos]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

 

[Orangecat]

Both are used in reference to the general welfare but not the common defense.

Still true: Provide and promote have different meanings.

 

[danielpalos]

Both are used in reference to the general welfare but not the common defense.

Still true: Provide and promote have different meanings.

Yes, and Both are expressly enumerated for the general welfare, not the Common defense.

 

[The Original Tree]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

Please quit copying and pasting CCP Propaganda or you are going to be banned for being a BOT.

 

[Orangecat]

It is merely and only, compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Capitalism has no requirement to employ everyone. You just want free shit that other, more industrious and competent people have earned.

 

[hadit]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

Your misunderstanding is where that capital comes from in the first place. This is the opportunity cost I'm talking about. That money comes from people's paychecks, reducing their ability to provide for their families. It comes out of capital funds, reducing the amount of capital available for business startups. It doesn't just materialize.

 

[danielpalos]

It is merely and only, compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Capitalism has no requirement to employ everyone. You just want free shit that other, more industrious and competent people have earned.

You are Right about that right winger. Capitalism doesn't have to care about externalities like poverty or war; except for profit motive potential.

It is why we have the social-ism of Government.

 

[georgephillip]

nvestments are meant to make money; not guaruntee bankruptcy. Youre fucking crazy if you think handing out 4 trillion per year is a good idea.

What's the multiplier effect of that $4 trillion?

https://pulse.naspo.org/post/keeping-up-with-the-economy-local-economic-multipliers/

The multiplier effect - Economics Help

How many jobs are created/saved?

If UBI replaces most of today's welfare benefits, is society more prosperous and egalitarian?

 

[Godboy]

Anyone who supports handing out 4 trillion per year is irrelevant.

Educate yourself.

http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_698.pdf

No one cares about your goofy wallstreet paranoia.

 

[Orangecat]

You just want free shit that other, more industrious and competent people have earned.

You are Right about that

Of course I am.

Capitalism doesn't have to care about externalities like poverty or war; except for profit motive potential.

^^^Typical moonbat nutter emotional illogic.
Capitalism doesn't have human emotions like "caring".

 

[Godboy]

nvestments are meant to make money; not guaruntee bankruptcy. Youre fucking crazy if you think handing out 4 trillion per year is a good idea.

What's the multiplier effect of that $4 trillion?

https://pulse.naspo.org/post/keeping-up-with-the-economy-local-economic-multipliers/

The multiplier effect - Economics Help

How many jobs are created/saved?

If UBI replaces most of today's welfare benefits, is society more prosperous and egalitarian?

Giving away money is going to make more money? Is that what youre trying to tell me?

 

[hadit]

nvestments are meant to make money; not guaruntee bankruptcy. Youre fucking crazy if you think handing out 4 trillion per year is a good idea.

What's the multiplier effect of that $4 trillion?

https://pulse.naspo.org/post/keeping-up-with-the-economy-local-economic-multipliers/

The multiplier effect - Economics Help

How many jobs are created/saved?

If UBI replaces most of today's welfare benefits, is society more prosperous and egalitarian?

You have to also consider the opportunity cost of taking that money out of the economy in the first place.

 

[danielpalos]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

Your misunderstanding is where that capital comes from in the first place. This is the opportunity cost I'm talking about. That money comes from people's paychecks, reducing their ability to provide for their families. It comes out of capital funds, reducing the amount of capital available for business startups. It doesn't just materialize.

Are you new here? What do you believe QE was, besides helping the Rich but not the Poor?

 

[danielpalos]

nvestments are meant to make money; not guaruntee bankruptcy. Youre fucking crazy if you think handing out 4 trillion per year is a good idea.

What's the multiplier effect of that $4 trillion?

https://pulse.naspo.org/post/keeping-up-with-the-economy-local-economic-multipliers/

The multiplier effect - Economics Help

How many jobs are created/saved?

If UBI replaces most of today's welfare benefits, is society more prosperous and egalitarian?

Giving away money is going to make more money? Is that what youre trying to tell me?

Yes, it is called a multiplier effect under Capitalism.

 

[Godboy]

nvestments are meant to make money; not guaruntee bankruptcy. Youre fucking crazy if you think handing out 4 trillion per year is a good idea.

What's the multiplier effect of that $4 trillion?

https://pulse.naspo.org/post/keeping-up-with-the-economy-local-economic-multipliers/

The multiplier effect - Economics Help

How many jobs are created/saved?

If UBI replaces most of today's welfare benefits, is society more prosperous and egalitarian?

Giving away money is going to make more money? Is that what youre trying to tell me?

Yes, it is called a multiplier effect under Capitalism.

Is called liberal propaganda. That shit isnt going to work. Youre delusional.

 

[DBA]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

Your misunderstanding is where that capital comes from in the first place. This is the opportunity cost I'm talking about. That money comes from people's paychecks, reducing their ability to provide for their families. It comes out of capital funds, reducing the amount of capital available for business startups. It doesn't just materialize.

Are you new here? What do you believe QE was, besides helping the Rich but not the Poor?

WRONG. It could be argued that QE helps the banks and rich more than mainstream American, however, unemployment rates tend to decrease and many benefit from low interest rates. The real issue here seems to be a common theme with those on the left. If the rich get richer and the poor get richer, it is still bad. Only if the "rich" get poorer and the poor get richer is it good. It all boils down to simple envy, plain and simple.

 

[hadit]

How are they going to automate when you're taking additional trillions out of the economy?

What are you talking about? Solving simple poverty is a Stimulus not a deterrent. More people spending more money to circulate in our economy.

When you take money out of the economy, economic activity slows down. Fewer jobs are created, more jobs are lost, fewer houses are bought, more houses foreclosed on, more bankruptcies happen, incomes drop, tax revenue drops. Do you get the picture? You're shooting the horse, hoping to heal its broken leg.

I would agree with you in general, but your understanding of what is actually being proposed is a misunderstanding not any form of economic logic or reasoning.

UC in its current form has already demonstrated a multiplier of two. Improving that function could render the multiplier even higher.

Equal protection of the law for UC is simply more efficient for our economy when the unemployed can more fully participate in our market economy by simply circulating Capital under our form of Capitalism.

Your misunderstanding is where that capital comes from in the first place. This is the opportunity cost I'm talking about. That money comes from people's paychecks, reducing their ability to provide for their families. It comes out of capital funds, reducing the amount of capital available for business startups. It doesn't just materialize.

Are you new here? What do you believe QE was, besides helping the Rich but not the Poor?

What does QE have to do with it? QE was borrowing a lot of money that will have to come out of the economy. It was done as an emergency measure to prevent economic collapse, not as a long-term measure to provide welfare benefits.