Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You've been given a dozen opportunities to define it objectively in no uncertain terms, and have refused each and every.
LOL.
Yuk yuk yuk yuk
Oh look, a three stooges reference. Classy.
I have defined it before. Apparently you choose to ignore that when replying. Most likely you are hoping to drag me down into the conversation of minutia, and then compare it to why railroad tunnels are the width of two draft horses.
Quote:
That's because you don't understand Economics.
Sooo...do you believe in income equality yet?
Quote:
Show us how smart you are:
Do you take the $100,000 IT Job in White Plains NJ, or the $58,000 exact same IT Job with the same company in Cincinnati?
The $58,000 is more than $100,000.
Which is 100% irrelevant to the discussion of a basic income. Its not going to be adjusted for COL. If you can't afford to live somewhere you should move. I do not understand why I have to keep repeating this to you over and over.
Quote:
That's right....the US is not Iceland.
Gasp! Really? And thats relevant how?
Quote:
That's immoral and stupid.
Children whose parents get Food Stamps are starving because their parents are committing Food Stamp Fraud. Give those parents money, and the children will be worse off.
Geuss what? If parents starve their children by choice, we have a thing in place already to take those children from them.
Calling this immoral and stupid while you posted earlier about removing welfare from single parents under the age of 36 makes this ironic.
Quote:
Did I mention the US is not Iceland?
Yes I do believe you mentioned something totally irrelevant like that.
Quote:
There are 1,539 separately functioning micro-economies in the US, in spite of your insistence that there are not.
Nope there still are-I'm just pointing out its irrelevant. A basic income is not to allow you to live in the most expensive place in the US. I am unsure how I can make this more clear.
Quote:
Seeing how States calculate their own individual poverty levels based on a weighted average of those micro-economies, how daft is it to deny they exist?
Because its irrelevant?
Quote:
Since you reject your own government's claim that the federal poverty level is a weighted average of the poverty levels of each of the 48 contiguous States, your $1,500 per person per month is a massive fail.
Because you cannot comprehend why that is irrelevant to the discussion its a massive fail? Got it.
Quote:
That's illegal since it violates the 14th Amendment.
which can be changed.
Quote:
Laughing at the superior intellect...
Mircea
Yes I can hear the 3 stooges yuk yuk yuk that you quoted earlier. You are no captain Kirk.
I have defined it before. Apparently you choose to ignore that when replying. Most likely you are hoping to drag me down into the conversation of minutia, and then compare it to why railroad tunnels are the width of two draft horses.
Sooo...do you believe in income equality yet?
Which is 100% irrelevant to the discussion of a basic income. Its not going to be adjusted for COL. If you can't afford to live somewhere you should move. I do not understand why I have to keep repeating this to you over and over.
Gasp! Really? And thats relevant how?
Geuss what? If parents starve their children by choice, we have a thing in place already to take those children from them.
Calling this immoral and stupid while you posted earlier about removing welfare from single parents under the age of 36 makes this ironic.
Yes I do believe you mentioned something totally irrelevant like that.
Nope there still are-I'm just pointing out its irrelevant. A basic income is not to allow you to live in the most expensive place in the US. I am unsure how I can make this more clear.
Because its irrelevant?
Because you cannot comprehend why that is irrelevant to the discussion its a massive fail? Got it.
which can be changed.
Yes I can hear the 3 stooges yuk yuk yuk that you quoted earlier. You are no captain Kirk.
Do you really think that politicians and political parties will advocate for a basic income? And who gets to decide what is basic, how do you deal with enormous geographic differences and inflation?
You have said that basic income replaces other safety nets. But how does that work when prices go up, healthcare becomes more expensive, etc.
When you give people food, you are helping them with food right on target. If you get people the monetary equivalent of the food, people end up wasting the money and need more to cover food. In some shape or form, that money ends up spent on the rich's products and in the rich's pockets.
A basic income didn't even exist in communist countries much. I don't think its relevant.
And who gets to decide what is basic, how do you deal with enormous geographic differences and inflation?
I think 20% of GDP is a good target. No need to adjust for different areas, that will take care of itself. If all the slackers want to move to Mississippi for the low COL, I think that would be fine. Most people will work though, and wages will reflect supply and demand.
Quote:
When you give people food, you are helping them with food right on target. If you get people the monetary equivalent of the food, people end up wasting the money and need more to cover food.
Are you that stupid? How many people do you think are that dumb? And even if it's a lot, so what?
Quote:
A basic income didn't even exist in communist countries much. I don't think its relevant.
It isn't a communist concept.
It's a simple, universal, low overhead, non-invasive way to account for capitalism's tendency to concentrate wealth and power into few hands, and to drive the floor wage to subsistence. It can take the place of welfare, foodstamps, EIC, unemployment, disability, social security, minimum wages, etc. It is very supportive of liberty and personal responsibility.
I think 20% of GDP is a good target. No need to adjust for different areas, that will take care of itself. If all the slackers want to move to Mississippi for the low COL, I think that would be fine. Most people will work though, and wages will reflect supply and demand.
Are you that stupid? How many people do you think are that dumb? And even if it's a lot, so what?
It isn't a communist concept.
It's a simple, universal, low overhead, non-invasive way to account for capitalism's tendency to concentrate wealth and power into few hands, and to drive the floor wage to subsistence. It can take the place of welfare, foodstamps, EIC, unemployment, disability, social security, minimum wages, etc. It is very supportive of liberty and personal responsibility.
Lots of people can not control their spending. And you don't think its problem? Your "so what" means you would watch your system fall apart.
What personal responsibility is there when people get a guaranteed income?
Of course it takes the place of all the welfare. It's much more expensive than welfare.
Do you really think that politicians and political parties will advocate for a basic income? And who gets to decide what is basic, how do you deal with enormous geographic differences and inflation?
I think its inevitable. Certainly not now, or in the short term however. And I believe what will drive it will be the automation that is coming to replace a significant portion of jobs rather rapidly.
I think politicians will be forced to it, first in other countries, then eventually here. Some on the right have suggested it, as well as on the left. But really what will drive it will be basic economics of a nation undergoing rapid transformation.
Quote:
You have said that basic income replaces other safety nets. But how does that work when prices go up, healthcare becomes more expensive, etc.
You peg it to inflation. Also notice how we talk about how healthcare is so expensive, much of that is a US problem-other countries are spending half as much for better results. We're doing it wrong.
Quote:
When you give people food, you are helping them with food right on target. If you get people the monetary equivalent of the food, people end up wasting the money and need more to cover food. In some shape or form, that money ends up spent on the rich's products and in the rich's pockets.
If they have more then enough to cover their bills, including food, I assure you that the desire to eat will figure itself out pretty quick.
Quote:
A basic income didn't even exist in communist countries much. I don't think its relevant.
Its becoming a more popular topic. Canada ran a program once, and even the US voted on one in the senate.
Switzerland is voting on one this year. I expect it to fail.
While I believe its inevitable, I dont think its soon.
Lots of people can not control their spending. And you don't think its problem? Your "so what" means you would watch your system fall apart.
What personal responsibility is there when people get a guaranteed income?
Of course it takes the place of all the welfare. It's much more expensive than welfare.
Is it?
No the more I study it I recognize its not as expensive as I had first assumed. Research indicates it would cut imprisonment by 40% for example.
for me most of the numbers used means its a wash, I neither lose, not get more. I have a 6 figure income (barely).
So personal responsibility is based off of...what? The danger of being homeless? The risk of not having food to eat?
Sorry but no. Personal responsibility is formed while growing up, where these things weren't even a concern for you. The system wont fall apart.....that's hilarious. What makes you believe that?
No the more I study it I recognize its not as expensive as I had first assumed. Research indicates it would cut imprisonment by 40% for example.
for me most of the numbers used means its a wash, I neither lose, not get more. I have a 6 figure income (barely).
So personal responsibility is based off of...what? The danger of being homeless? The risk of not having food to eat?
Sorry but no. Personal responsibility is formed while growing up, where these things weren't even a concern for you. The system wont fall apart.....that's hilarious. What makes you believe that?
Personal responsibility is so poor in America precisely because people are so spoiled and there was plenty. Everyone gets a trophy. It became legitimate to simply ask and depend on other people.
You made e point that when it covers more than bills, the desire to eat will figure itself out. That's illogical. If people have more than they need to pay, they are much less cautious and appreciative. They tend to be loose when using money. When people are short of something, they figure out a way to prioritize for necessities such as food. The problem is precisely that people may have more than what they need.
I think its inevitable. Certainly not now, or in the short term however. And I believe what will drive it will be the automation that is coming to replace a significant portion of jobs rather rapidly.
I think politicians will be forced to it, first in other countries, then eventually here. Some on the right have suggested it, as well as on the left. But really what will drive it will be basic economics of a nation undergoing rapid transformation.
You peg it to inflation. Also notice how we talk about how healthcare is so expensive, much of that is a US problem-other countries are spending half as much for better results. We're doing it wrong.
If they have more then enough to cover their bills, including food, I assure you that the desire to eat will figure itself out pretty quick.
Its becoming a more popular topic. Canada ran a program once, and even the US voted on one in the senate.
Switzerland is voting on one this year. I expect it to fail.
While I believe its inevitable, I dont think its soon.
it is still a bit premature to conclude that automation will eliminate the majority of jobs. Automation has always created new jobs, new professions, new markets. The transitions, one of which is our era, see growing pains as people struggle to adapt to new skills and technologies. Across america, the job market is getting stronger. Salaries are rising again. Employers have started offering training. It has also been noted that america may face labor shortage, especially in some fields. If that were to be real, wages would go up. On top of that, thousands of baby boomers retire every day and will continue such trend for many years.
More and more young people are making smart decisions to acquire marketable skills, adapt to new opportunities. The problem is that many middle aged people do not adapt to these things. Automation is a dirty word. It's sort of this logic of the old being right and the new being wrong. And it's ultimately fruitless. Technology will change the world and people will once again adapt. The robots that replace two Burger King employees will need designers, testers, maintainence experts, Analytics, assessers, project managers, translators, visual designers, programmers, etc. the jobs will basically shift to technology related fields. The Burger King employees will need to learn new skills to find jobs. A basic guaranteed income, especially when more than paying your bills, will not encourage people to work toward these skills. They can be very draining and challenging to acquire. People who see themselves far from it won't think it's worth it. It's easy to give up on yourself when such a give up means a guaranteed income.
I don't think the rest of the world will adopt your basic income idea. Much of east Asia will be economically strong with a rising middle class and very smart working people. Europe will gradually become more like the USA.
it is still a bit premature to conclude that automation will eliminate the majority of jobs. Automation has always created new jobs, new professions, new markets.
This time it will be different, because the machines are getting smarter. I think the odds are very good that the oligarchy has been planning for this for a long time already.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
