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.
No, I'm not justifying it, I am talking about preventing it.
If I say it is prudent to lock your house when you are away, am I saying that it is morally OK for a thief to enter? Of course not.
Same distinction.
Unfortunately, capitalism does not guarantee that there will always be enough jobs to go around, so your argument is weak.
Actually, true capitalism does. There would still be those that don't work, but there will always be the lazy and the criminal that refuse to support themselves. We don't practice true capitalism in this country.
Your argument regarding crime was that it was "natural". I disagree. While I might lock my door, I refuse to think it's natural that someone may come in and steal from me. And paying someone money to keep them from robbing me isn't natural, either. That's extortion.
As for preventing crime by paying folks a BI, I think we've agreed that welfare does that, and yet there is still crime. How do you explain giving someone a replacement for welfare stopping crime?
Of COURSE it is. But BI would result in the same thing.
Good lord, are people this dense for real?
Depends on how you do the BI and what the rules are. If everyone gets the same BI, there is no cliff effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise
Actually, true capitalism does. There would still be those that don't work, but there will always be the lazy and the criminal that refuse to support themselves. We don't practice true capitalism in this country.
Right, there are both lazy people and people who are honestly SOL. To deal with the former, eliminate the welfare cliff effect. To deal with the latter, there needs to be some safety net.
Of course if you want an extreme example, I can mention the quadriplegic who genuinely cannot work, but of course there are less obvious cases of "not-at-fault joblessness" resulting from sluggish economic flow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise
Your argument regarding crime was that it was "natural". I disagree. While I might lock my door, I refuse to think it's natural that someone may come in and steal from me. And paying someone money to keep them from robbing me isn't natural, either. That's extortion.
As for preventing crime by paying folks a BI, I think we've agreed that welfare does that, and yet there is still crime. How do you explain giving someone a replacement for welfare stopping crime?
It does not reduce the crime rate to zero. But it still prevents it from skyrocketing to the levels it otherwise would.
Things like unions were great and necessarily when people are working in unsafe conditions and have zero rights , not when they let people do nothing all day and get paid for it.
Actually the most developed countries are very highly unionized now.
Quote:
1)we have a global economy now and didn't back then.
Since globalization sucks for 99.9% of our population, then why are we doing it?
Quote:
2) a lot of the good from that time period was paid for on credit that was unsustainable.
Nope. Fiscal and private debt escalation began in 1980. Look it up. We've been living in a debt stimulated economy since then. Oddly it coincides very well with "globalization".
Quote:
3)people lived in smaller houses, had one car etc
Only one person needed to work.
Quote:
4)it was a great time if you were a white male. not so much if you were a woman, had dark skin, were gay etc.
5) medical care was a lot worse than it is now.
That is delusional, at best. There's a reason that most lottery winners are broke soon after winning. If you're on welfare and have not been able to lift yourself out of poverty, then a BI would be more of the same.
Calling it something different doesn't change what it is - a redistribution of wealth.
But guess what, the fix for our economic woes is the redistribution of wealth. With wages or social programs or what ever that is what is needed to get our economy going.
But guess what, the fix for our economic woes is the redistribution of wealth. With wages or social programs or what ever that is what is needed to get our economy going.
Actually the most developed countries are very highly unionized now.
Since globalization sucks for 99.9% of our population, then why are we doing it?
Nope. Fiscal and private debt escalation began in 1980. Look it up. We've been living in a debt stimulated economy since then. Oddly it coincides very well with "globalization".
Only one person needed to work.
Nothing to do with economics.
We have a global economy because of technological changes.
The escalation started in the 80s? What do you think unsustainable pensions from the 50s were? It's really easy at the beginning to say " yea we'll pay you a full salary from when you retire to when you die" when those bills aren't due for 30 years.it's the same thing with social security. It started at 1% and paid people who never paid into it. You can only increase it and pay people more than they pay into it for so long. Of course that piece of garbage FDR knew he would be long dead before this happened.
Only one person needs to work now if you want to live in a tiny house, with no phones, internet, tv,one car in the middle of nowhere.If you want to argue it was easier to get a well paying job for white males than it is now I'd agree with you. But that doesn't mean it was ever sustainable.
As for "nothing to do with economics"
When minorities and women couldn't get a good job at all and had no rights, that left more good jobs for white men who glorify those times.
When medical care is absolute garbage it doesn't cost much.When health insurance doesn't exist or is in its infancy it doesn't cost much.
When medical care gets better, there are generations of people who don't care what anything cost because insurance pays for it, there are tons of medical lawsuits, shockingly the cost of the insurance itself and actual medical care keeps going up outpacing inflation.
Just like I could live like a king for a year or two on credit, a country can do great for a short time when it's on borrowed money, or the negative effects don't happen for decades.Eventually the **** will hit the fan though. And bills literally and figuratively come due.
Last edited by djohnslaw; 03-09-2016 at 02:57 PM..
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.
