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.
Ah, the unintended consequences. If you take MY money, to guarantee YOUR income, then I get to dictate how you live. And if that means you get roommates, or live in a dorm, then that's the price YOU pay to take MY money. You don't get to live a luxury lifestyle with MY money.
a lot has happened in 16 years..including a few RE bubbles.
On average rents have risen 70% since then. So scale appropriately. Cheap areas will have risen less than that. Loads of places where median rent is <$350/mo.
In the poorhouses I advocate, nearly half the budget would be spent on security. There would be no ghetto crime, and no vices such as drugs, smoking, drinking, etc. There would be no need for roommates, because rooms for single people would be extremely small. Just barely big enough to fit a twin-size bed, a small closet, and a small table. Or if there was enough of a budget, the rooms might have their own small bathrooms. The building entrance doors would have metal detectors. All weapons would be confiscated. Everyone would have security gadgets while in the building, which would have features such as a panic button and a worry timer
Your scenario will explode the homeless population. I used to live in a town that used city money to put in a homeless camp. It lasted a short time, but eventually closed down because the folks in the camp just could not abide by the rule that prohibited drugs and alcohol. So they left the camp, but stayed in the area. Eventually, the camp was almost empty, but crime in the area increased.
There a lot of people that would just not tolerate those rules and will hit the streets.
The nature of Basic Income is such that it would be in addition to the OASI. Because, Basic Income can't have any qualifications, or it would not be Basic Income. Therefore, receiving OASI can't disqualify people from receiving Basic Income. OASI is something you earn from a lifetime of work. Not something that can be replaced by welfare.
But the argument posed by supporters of Basic Income is that you can eliminate all Welfare Programs including Social Security and Medicare.
In the poorhouses I advocate, nearly half the budget would be spent on security. There would be no ghetto crime, and no vices such as drugs, smoking, drinking, etc. There would be no need for roommates, because rooms for single people would be extremely small. Just barely big enough to fit a twin-size bed, a small closet, and a small table. Or if there was enough of a budget, the rooms might have their own small bathrooms. The building entrance doors would have metal detectors. All weapons would be confiscated. Everyone would have security gadgets while in the building, which would have features such as a panic button and a worry timer
So prison but the door is unlocked and you get a free bus pass?
I'd have no problem with that level of subsistence living as the "stick" in the carrot and stick. That's where you get put if you're a convicted felon or if you broke the rules of the game and cranked out more babies while on public assistance.
If someone is truly disabled and can't work, I'd like to see a more generous safety net than we have now. If they're disabled due to self-induced problems, it would be far less generous than someone disabled via pure bad luck. If someone is taking steps to obtain 21st century job skills and recovering from some bad life decisions, those people should also have generous benefits.
For the people who landed in that SuperMax college dorm housing, I'd make clearly defined rules to move up into higher tiers of housing and assistance with far more autonomy. "The carrot". I think we want public policy that rewards people for improving themselves and living by the rules.
Ah, the unintended consequences. If you take MY money, to guarantee YOUR income, then I get to dictate how you live. And if that means you get roommates, or live in a dorm, then that's the price YOU pay to take MY money. You don't get to live a luxury lifestyle with MY money.
So you support legalizing adult dorms? And what about if you and your fellow taxpayers cannot agree on how those folks should spend it, then what?
Ok, so when are you going to advocate changing the laws to legalize adult dorms?
It is the epitome of cruelty to force people into homelessness by simultaneously insisting they downsize while making it legally impossible to do so.
Yet, you don't think it's cruel to steal money from folks that have worked hard to get where they are, and give it to those that have not? Interesting.
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.