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.
Luckily not homeless anymore but that's not saying much, I'd agree.
However, I am literally proud to have donated all I could. I've not felt this same sense of pride and love of country since Army infantry decades ago.
I'm literally pitching in to make the country -- and the world -- better.
I have no more money to give but I do phone-bank, text-bank, and "internet-bank" (like right now) when I can.
I've never done anything political, not even voted, never having felt that any politician -- including Bernie -- would actually affect my life directly and tremendously.
But with Andrew...it's such a perfect meeting of my own destiny and the fate of the world.
Can't rep you for this, I must have repped you for some other post so now the system doesn't let me.
Andrew Yang has inspired many of us, not just many Americans. He will inspire even more people in time.
I actually wrote a song about YangGang. Now I'm learning to use one of those softwares for arranging music to present it. It will take some time.
In the meantime, here is a smart boomer from Iowa in an interesting interview.
I totally agree with everything you say. I also believe Andrew will be our next President. I will be utterly shocked if he isn't. I didn't donate $700 on minimum-wage earnings with no savings simply to gamble. Pity I can't do more -- though it was never up to me anyway: Andrew's the Zeitgeist incarnate, the flotsam and jetsam of the universe converging on a pivotal moment to produce precisely what is needed, the Man of the Hour who's naturally arisen out of circumstance to change circumstance: DEVS VULT.
I don't know about "this thread" but I can see for myself that you refuse evidence while insisting on your own preconceived notions, belying the point of a conversation.
Maybe you're just an "old soul."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
This is what happens when a person won't view the material that's been posted for their review and is exactly how gossip gets started.
If you can't articulate the argument then there is nothing for me to say, long winded videos and interviews aren't unique to the problems I've brought up.
I even looked at the link for UBI, and have heard the same thing many times before; just look at finland's failed UBI plan.
Anyways arguing UBI will have a cultural impact ignores the nature of power in controlling our values.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 26 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,590,375 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
This is what happens when a person won't view the material that's been posted for their review and is exactly how gossip gets started.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
If you can't articulate the argument then there is nothing for me to say, long winded videos and interviews aren't unique to the problems I've brought up.
I even looked at the link for UBI, and have heard the same thing many times before; just look at finland's failed UBI plan.
Anyways arguing UBI will have a cultural impact ignores the nature of power in controlling our values.
If you go to my post, Why would you oppose UBI?, and start the video at 6:46 ... "The effects are greater (ie. India) than the monetary value. It enhances your ability to make choices. It removes the poverty trap of the means tested ..."
"Regarding increased trust, respondents who received a basic income had more trust in other people and in societal institutions — i.e., politicians, political parties, police and the courts — than members of the control group. On a scale from 0 to 10, the average score for trust in other people increased from 6.3 in the control group, to 6.8 amongst basic income recipients. As for trust in politicians and political parties, the average score increased from 4.0 to 4.5. For the combined category of courts and the police, the average score increased from 6.9 to 7.2."
" ... Minna confirmed that the experiment has been more limited in scope than was originally planned by Kela researchers, and that to date there has been no observable effect on take-up of employment (on the long-term unemployed participants in the experiment). Answering a phone survey (around 30% of the participants), Minna refers that those in the BI trial reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and well-being, more confidence in the future and self-perceived better mental health in comparison with the control group. Even though the data analysis process is not over yet, this process may not a include a second phone survey."
If you go to my post, Why would you oppose UBI?, and start the video at 6:46 ... "The effects are greater (ie. India) than the monetary value. It enhances your ability to make choices. It removes the poverty trap of the means tested ..."
"Regarding increased trust, respondents who received a basic income had more trust in other people and in societal institutions — i.e., politicians, political parties, police and the courts — than members of the control group. On a scale from 0 to 10, the average score for trust in other people increased from 6.3 in the control group, to 6.8 amongst basic income recipients. As for trust in politicians and political parties, the average score increased from 4.0 to 4.5. For the combined category of courts and the police, the average score increased from 6.9 to 7.2."
" ... Minna confirmed that the experiment has been more limited in scope than was originally planned by Kela researchers, and that to date there has been no observable effect on take-up of employment (on the long-term unemployed participants in the experiment). Answering a phone survey (around 30% of the participants), Minna refers that those in the BI trial reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and well-being, more confidence in the future and self-perceived better mental health in comparison with the control group. Even though the data analysis process is not over yet, this process may not a include a second phone survey."
The first thing after the 6:46 time stamp is that in India most of the traditional welfare doesn't even reach its targeted recipients due to corruption.
America has corruption, but not that type. Nothing here shows any similarities between a market economy like the United States and a Barter economy like India.
I know the difference, I've seen it.
For the 'emancipatory' affect, its all very loosely insinuated. I agree that means tested welfare programs that try to control behavior are bad.
I mean the forefront of my desire is to stop mandated behavior from the population. In America welfare operates much in the same way, as does a negative tax rate. But there are many reasons for this, mainly to stimulate taxable income rather than non-effective labor. Note that in America its not just welfare the controls behavioral economic activities, but also credit companies, large businesses, consumption sales, and marketers. Our economy is much more deliberate and organized to benefit the ultra rich, taking away welfare is only a fraction of the problem, and in many cases UBI reinforces the other causes leading to a net gain of 0.
The non-effective labor comes from the fact that we live in a unified market where all suppliers feed into the same pricing and consumption fields. Everything is globalized, and supply chains are owned by one source of capital.
India does not have that producer second mind set in many of its poorer areas as not all labor is pooled together into the same market; villagers aren't employed or even buy the same goods that benefit shareholders; so subtracting the costs of corruption and the fact that UBI is just a stimulus for village economies rather than alternative redistribution effort, I'm sure its more popular among the peasants.
The two quotes from Finland are bad, and I don't just mean because the test pilot was dropped for a plethora of reasons.
I mean that what they insinuate are bad. Trust in political institutions/economic institutions is bad. We want to promote skepticism, not conformity. When people have more economic indulgences they're more likely to let powerful people structure the world how they like.
A submissive population isn't a good thing. The problem is power, not who controls it.
And the second bolded quote on freedom of choice and self-perception is even worse. And not just because studies like that don't scale well and are very circumstantial. People's emotions can't be explained by general questioning.
But even disregarding that its bad because people don't need success to be happy, they need rights; inflation can more or less re-balance a society that has growing wages to bring back the same financial problems.
Its not about how much money they have or what economic choices they can make, it is having control over their labor, and making social activities a result of economic interactions. People build society, not money.
The rest is just retreading old ground. The 5 minute video confirmed everything I already knew, Silicon Valley sees opportunity in Yang; Yang believes the fourth industrial revolution will mean corporate America and private innovators will control everything. Its silly because all tech innovation is a creation of the state, not the invisible hand of the market (as I explained in my big post).
I know you agree but I just don't. Have anything on how Bitcoin is a replacement to the monetary system?
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 26 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,590,375 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
The first thing after the 6:46 time stamp is that in India most of the traditional welfare doesn't even reach its targeted recipients due to corruption.
America has corruption, but not that type. Nothing here shows any similarities between a market economy like the United States and a Barter economy like India.
I know the difference, I've seen it.
For the 'emancipatory' affect, its all very loosely insinuated. I agree that means tested welfare programs that try to control behavior are bad.
I mean the forefront of my desire is to stop mandated behavior from the population. In America welfare operates much in the same way, as does a negative tax rate. But there are many reasons for this, mainly to stimulate taxable income rather than non-effective labor. Note that in America its not just welfare the controls behavioral economic activities, but also credit companies, large businesses, consumption sales, and marketers. Our economy is much more deliberate and organized to benefit the ultra rich, taking away welfare is only a fraction of the problem, and in many cases UBI reinforces the other causes leading to a net gain of 0.
The non-effective labor comes from the fact that we live in a unified market where all suppliers feed into the same pricing and consumption fields. Everything is globalized, and supply chains are owned by one source of capital.
India does not have that producer second mind set in many of its poorer areas as not all labor is pooled together into the same market; villagers aren't employed or even buy the same goods that benefit shareholders; so subtracting the costs of corruption and the fact that UBI is just a stimulus for village economies rather than alternative redistribution effort, I'm sure its more popular among the peasants.
The two quotes from Finland are bad, and I don't just mean because the test pilot was dropped for a plethora of reasons.
I mean that what they insinuate are bad. Trust in political institutions/economic institutions is bad. We want to promote skepticism, not conformity. When people have more economic indulgences they're more likely to let powerful people structure the world how they like.
A submissive population isn't a good thing. The problem is power, not who controls it.
And the second bolded quote on freedom of choice and self-perception is even worse. And not just because studies like that don't scale well and are very circumstantial. People's emotions can't be explained by general questioning.
But even disregarding that its bad because people don't need success to be happy, they need rights; inflation can more or less re-balance a society that has growing wages to bring back the same financial problems.
Its not about how much money they have or what economic choices they can make, it is having control over their labor, and making social activities a result of economic interactions. People build society, not money.
The rest is just retreading old ground. The 5 minute video confirmed everything I already knew, Silicon Valley sees opportunity in Yang; Yang believes the fourth industrial revolution will mean corporate America and private innovators will control everything. Its silly because all tech innovation is a creation of the state, not the invisible hand of the market (as I explained in my big post).
I know you agree but I just don't. Have anything on how Bitcoin is a replacement to the monetary system?
Quote:
The first thing after the 6:46 time stamp is that in India most of the traditional welfare doesn't even reach its targeted recipients due to corruption.
America has corruption, but not that type.
Back when my children were little I had medicare, (divorced, father did not provide healthcare) I took my daughter in for a medical issue. The attending Dr. noticed (not what we were there for) that her hands were small. They wanted me to take her over to the hospital to have an X-ray done of her hands so as to determine whether or not she was dwarfed. (not taking into account mom is standing there at 5' and 98 lbs) It was nonsense and I didn't do it. What they saw was medicare $$$. Now look at a practice(s) [habit] on a larger scale, within the system, that has nothing to do with the recipient but a lot to do with costs of medical. (there were more situations where as I connected the dots, but that is the only dot my memory has left to reflect on)
The food stamp division use to pass out what was looked at as funny money. When a person went to a grocery store and paid their bill, it was something that would pop for every one around to see --- poor person, funny money. Because of that it was recognized do to pride that many people lived without food, due to the embarrassment at the check out counters of the grocery store. (i worked for Transactive corp who had the contract for the EBT project, but the project I worked on was a different contract, same programming though; same Verfone box)
The welfare department came up with the idea of the EBT card, as it acted much the same and the look of a credit card. With the idea that perhaps they could then reach more of the targeted recipients. While that may have worked some what, there are still those that will not, due to a variety of reasons, reach out to the government for assistance. One major reason ... the government [big brother] is going to track the person receiving the benefits and they will get, very intrusive. Some people would rather just starve, than to be hooked into that system.
Quote:
The non-effective labor comes from the fact that we live in a unified market where all suppliers feed into the same pricing and consumption fields. Everything is globalized, and supply chains are owned by one source of capital.
What is the source? Something you said in another post:
Quote:
Automation isn't the driving force in centralizing wealth. Banking, global trade, and our taxing system is.
"The world we’ve become accustomed to will not exist without supply chains. And further, the world is a mechanism for providing humanity with the resources we need to survive on Earth. We know this to be true -- “when supply chains function, societies thrive”.
<snip>
Supply chains are to human civilization what oxygen is to life; When they work well, no one notices them. It is only when they start to fail that we realize there’s a problem."
Quote:
A submissive population isn't a good thing. The problem is power, not who controls it.
Its not about how much money they have or what economic choices they can make, it is having control over their labor, and making social activities a result of economic interactions. People build society, not money.
Its a problem when a vast amount of the people in the society that could be utilized to build it are trapped living underneath a cardboard box.
Quote:
Trust in political institutions/economic institutions is bad.
The roaring 20's production was great and the people trusted their government. The Great Depression changed all that.
Quote:
Have anything on how Bitcoin is a replacement to the monetary system?
You interpreted what I said wrong; made me go back and look. Bitcoin is to the 21st century what Green Backs were to the 19th century --- untaxed means in the transfer of service and goods.
Can't rep you for this, I must have repped you for some other post so now the system doesn't let me.
Andrew Yang has inspired many of us, not just many Americans. He will inspire even more people in time.
I actually wrote a song about YangGang. Now I'm learning to use one of those softwares for arranging music to present it. It will take some time.
In the meantime, here is a smart boomer from Iowa in an interesting interview.
Thanks, I saw that one -- the problem for Yang 2020 is that while 92 to 94 percent of the electorate would benefit tremendously from The Freedom Dividend, only some 16% (projected to be about 25% this cycle) of Democrat voters in Iowa actually bother caucusing...and Andrew lacks name recognition.
Looking forward to Boomer Gang in Iowa -- as well as Zoomer Gang (and Millennials and Gen Xers, too) -- providing a surprise next February.
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.
