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, it makes perfect sense. You said: That's an odd position for you to take, a fair number of libertarians who are opposed to welfare advocate a guaranteed income because it fosters independence and self reliance and results in a smaller government.
I am not a libertarian. Libertarians who advocate redistribution of private property are simple leftist-statist-collectivists.
The option you seem to be suggesting would be to remove all benefits that require a transfer of wealth to someone in need, welfare, food benefits, education, medical care.
I don't "seem to be suggesting it", I am stating flat out that removal of wealth redistribution is mandatory if we want a good and healthy society. The fact that someone needs something does not create the right to take it.
And that comes with it's own set of problems: People living on the sidewalk creating public health and safety issues
Not a problem. Aggressive vagrants go to jail.
, no vaccinations for poor children reducing the 'herd effect' of vaccinations.
There is no "right" to vaccinations or any other form of health care. Health care is a service and should be purchased by people who want it and can afford it.
Increased theft and looting, the possibility of widespread demonstrations and even riots,
These are crimes and can be dealt with through the criminal justice system. The end point for any and all who initiate violence against others will be a prison cell.
reduction in educated workforce.
There is no "workforce". That is a collectivist construction. There are people who seek employment and agree to trade time and talent for money. That is a private relationship and should be left private.
Conclusion: Taking money from one group to give to another who threaten you with riots, vagrancy, or looting is mob rule and savage primitivism. We need to change the entire mindset. People need to be educated to be independent and functioning adults from the time they are born. There should be ZERO expectation that you have a right to the life and property of others simply because you need it.
You're right... I erred in that according to the US 2014 stats only 77 pct of Americans are over 18. So the numbers are off by 8 percent. MEA CULPA. I used $20k 'cause that's what all the geniuses on this thread were using. And exactly how much money are we saving, Sleepy?
I have no problem with the concept, but communism sounded real good to me when I was a young pup and that did not work out too good either. Just sayin'.
yeah giving people a cash grant instead of having welfare administered through over 100 programs is exactly what communists would do
Guaranteed income is just welfare in a pretty new box. It's still stealing money from one group of people for the unearned and undeserved benefit of another group of people. Which we know is immoral and evil. The idea is to get rid of welfare, not put new window dressing on it.
If we want to get rid of something, the best way to do it is to just do it. Get rid of it. Then it is gone and something that is bad and evil is no longer in our way.
Keep it simple. Provide notice. End it.
Tell me more about how the single mother working two jobs to feed her family in poverty doesn't deserve any wealth, and puffy-haired scam-artist Donald Trumps deserve every penny.
It sure would save a LOT of money in "red tape/services/handling" AND make it all equal. The only thing I see wrong with it is IF these babies mommas are rewarded $20K for each one of their little "windfalls"....we could see them breeding quicker than they already do.....
Take all the monies collected for all social services and then pay every single person in the country over the age of 18 $20,000 per year. But all social services are fully eliminated. No welfare, no food stamps, no unemployment, no housing money.... NOTHING.
People can take their $20K and use it to live on if they don't desire to work. Or, if they want to achieve more they can work in any way they want to. No one needs to beg for money. That's over. And the money is static.
How think ye?
People who can't afford kids could stop reproducing. That could help the situation.
I can't see any rational person having a problem with this plan. But of course a majority of us do. Even the o.p. doesn't really believe in it............
Do us a favor.
Multiply $20,000 a year times 236,000,000 people (that's how many are over 18). Be careful with all those zeroes.
You're going to get $5.7 Trillion dollars.
Now look at the federal budget. The whole thing; defense, roads, everything. It's $3.8 trillion dollars.
And you "don't see any rational person having a problem with this plan"? I did you a favor and deleted the comments you made about conservatives, since you have exposed yourself as..........well, not exactly the most omniscient person in the world.
Take all the monies collected for all social services and then pay every single person in the country over the age of 18 $20,000 per year. But all social services are fully eliminated. No welfare, no food stamps, no unemployment, no housing money.... NOTHING.
People can take their $20K and use it to live on if they don't desire to work. Or, if they want to achieve more they can work in any way they want to. No one needs to beg for money. That's over. And the money is static.
How think ye?
It would never work. You are assuming most people will be responsible enough to stretch that money and only buy necessities. A large portion will blow it all right away. Then when they have no food or housing what will they do? Commit crimes of theft and robbery?
It would never work. You are assuming most people will be responsible enough to stretch that money and only buy necessities. A large portion will blow it all right away. Then when they have no food or housing what will they do? Commit crimes of theft and robbery?
Oh please..what do people who earn a salary do when they run out of money, go rob someone? This micro management of adults through the current welfare system is absurd and wasteful. I already gave an example- Nevada cash grant for mom and 2 kids is $383, not enough to pay rent, the only way to pay rent is to sell food stamps for 50 cents on the dollar. How does that help either the taxpayer or the poor person? We spend a ton on HUD housing vouchers and they only are issued to 24% of welfare recipients, and part of the reason more people can't get them is because so much of that budget is taken up by recipients in LA or NY who receive $3000 a month or more for rent. If you give a cash grant that would cover $800 or $900 for rent people in those high cost areas may do well to consider moving, or sharing a rental with another family but at least ALL poor people would receive something for housing.
Umm, not to spoil your plan but giving people money from the government that they haven't earned is still welfare. So your plan is not eliminating welfare.
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.
