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.
We already do - it's called welfare. And it's not working. Otherwise, there would be no poverty. So more of something that already doesn't work will not make it better.
Oh, so now you're justifying crime? That it's OK to steal from folks that have worked hard for their property, when they have not? No, that's not "natural", in any universe. Even Liberal Land.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise
Let's be clear, that money is representative of the work put in to earning that money. We are protected from anyone that wishes to take it away from us, including the government.
There's a huge difference between paying taxes to pay for police protection, and paying taxes to give to someone else that is too lazy to earn that money themselves, so that they don't commit a crime.
Unfortunately, capitalism does not guarantee that there will always be enough jobs to go around, so your argument is weak.
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.
You didn't obtain that money in a vacuum. It was extracted from the system in some way.
Since the inception of the industrial revolution it was recognized that capitalism would be dysfunctional and self destruct unless there was a massive redistribution of wealth. That's why all functional countries have many avenues to make this happen. Public benefits, wage boosting and supports, unions, high income taxes, etc.
If you wish to rail against reality then go ahead and move to that taxless, governmentless, utopian fantasy and let us know how it goes.
The industrial revolution wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for capitalism and neither would most innovations we take for granted today. Amazing how nothing innovative ever comes out of these communist hell holes. 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.
When we tell everyone they're smart and special,have basically no trade schools, give 18 year olds access to 6 figure loans regardless of their intellect or ability, it's no surprise that tuition goes thru the roof, degree mills pop up, kids party for 4 years and major in nonsense and graduate no smarter and with no more qualifications than they had 4 years earlier and can't get a good job. We can also close our eyes and say how great the 1950s were and how we should go back to that while ignoring
1)we have a global economy now and didn't back then.
2) a lot of the good from that time period was paid for on credit that was unsustainable.
3)people lived in smaller houses, had one car etc
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.
If the people running this country remotely cared about spending tax dollars efficiently we could get by just fine with lower income taxes and gov't programs that actually help people who truly need it that wouldn't encourage generations of laziness and entitlements. But when politicians spend tax money like a 15 year old girl with daddy's credit card, the spending is just as ridiculous and foolish as the 15 year old girl's.
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.
How do you know that the problem isn't simply a combination of the welfare "cliff" effect and other poverty traps?
Would the tweaking include EVERYONE paying taxes? Everyone. Not just the dreaded, evil "rich". But everyone. Because if EVERYONE gets a guaranteed income, then EVERYONE should share in the pain of paying.
Would the tweaking include EVERYONE paying taxes? Everyone. Not just the dreaded, evil "rich". But everyone. Because if EVERYONE gets a guaranteed income, then EVERYONE should share in the pain of paying.
Well, if you set the basic income above the standard deduction and personal exemption, sure.
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.
