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.
mkpunk, I meant to add that the reason the stimulus check was given to most people - even those who didn't need it - was to get the economy moving again with people spending it. Those whose agi's were over $100K in 2019 didn't get any of it - but they're going to keep spending anyway.
Your statement that if everyone was getting UBI then not getting immediate relief from Unemployment wouldn't be an issue, is like saying, if people saved their money for emergencies then not getting immediate relief from Unemployment wouldn't be an issue. The only difference is, the onus is put on the individual in one case and on the government in the other. And if people did get an extra grand a month, they'd grow into that and likely not save for emergencies, so they'd be in the same boat they're in today.
There are people who don't make a ton of money who live in nice places and take nice vacations. And there are those who make six figures who have nothing because they blow what they make.
Even those who didn't get unemployment for five weeks got a stimulus check in the meantime, so why was the delay even an issue?
mkpunk, I meant to add that the reason the stimulus check was given to most people - even those who didn't need it - was to get the economy moving again with people spending it. Those whose agi's were over $100K in 2019 didn't get any of it - but they're going to keep spending anyway.
Your statement that if everyone was getting UBI then not getting immediate relief from Unemployment wouldn't be an issue, is like saying, if people saved their money for emergencies then not getting immediate relief from Unemployment wouldn't be an issue. The only difference is, the onus is put on the individual in one case and on the government in the other. And if people did get an extra grand a month, they'd grow into that and likely not save for emergencies, so they'd be in the same boat they're in today.
There are people who don't make a ton of money who live in nice places and take nice vacations. And there are those who make six figures who have nothing because they blow what they make.
Even those who didn't get unemployment for five weeks got a stimulus check in the meantime, so why was the delay even an issue?
And there's the crux of the matter that I mentioned in an earlier comment albeit put more succinctly by you, MP1: give many people a consistent flow of money that they've not earned and in time, feel entitled to having, and they will spend more without necessarily saving for the rainy days that inevitably come. Those who are already savers will save; those who are spenders will spend. It's a rare leopard who changes his spending "spots" easily and painlessly.
Some of the worst problems the US has are the loss of factories and jobs to China and the decline of our own work ethic. UBI will accelerate all of the above.
Some of the major problems hurting our country are the loss of factories and jobs to other countries, especially to China, combined with the decline of our own work ethic. UBI would make it even worse.
You are setting up a straw man. In fact, multiple straw men. I didn’t say “theft is wrongâ€. I said social thievery as a policy is wrong. Theft can be necessary and justified in an emergency. That doesn’t mean it is appropriate to construct a society based on the premise that it is acceptable for privately earned and owned wealth to be confiscated for the unearned and undeserved benefit of others.
Fair enough.
Quote:
Next, we do live under a system of merit and always have. The best people get the best outcomes overall. Not to say there isn’t episodic injustice. But if you go with trend analysis, you will see that the smartest and hardest working and focused quality people do overall achieve the best lives. That’s just reality. Your job? To become one of them through effort.
Yes, the best at making money for themselves or someone else. Ethics notwithstanding, that's what the law framework is supposed to be for. Of course, you can pay politicians to further leverage your wealth in your favor. Politicians get paid for their work, big companies get paid for theirs, someone else loses. Survival of the fittest, and I guess that's what meritocracy can be if you look at it through a profit-motive lens. UBI aside, I disagree that it's ever been "fair", and we probably disagree on what "fair" is, or if it's even a valid concept to start with. But big man crush little man is not magically fixed with capitalism. Whether or not that's more "fair" than theft of wealth at the top, who knows? Apparently you do.
Quote:
Third, there is no relevant scenario where a person who wants to work is economically obsolete in America in 2020. There is ALWAYS a job, if you want it and are diligent in looking for it. Plus, there is always the option to hire yourself by starting a business. So the automation theory of widespread economic obsolescence of human beings is a fallacy. Every new advance has created displacement, and there have always been new and better jobs.
Yes, money is never stagnant. It is always reinvested somewhere, constantly circulating. But the potential "problem" the automation theory provides would be the circulation of money between dramatically less hands in a short period of time, with homelessness and crime being the result of a lack of an adjustment period. I'm not saying it's definitely going to happen. But there's no hard and fast rule that money will always circulate between everyone. It's not that hard to imagine, stagnant people (by choice, IQ, educational resources) will not get paid. You say this yourself. What we disagree on is whether or not that can be a large % of the population.
Quote:
The key is for a person to NEVER assume that he will have a stable and reliable job. That has never existed. A job is a temporary agreement to provide time and talent in exchange for money. You must always be improving yourself to take advantage of new opportunities. Stagnation is not an option, and stagnation is the active choice to become obsolete. It’s not unlucky, it’s not unfortunate, it’s not an accident. It is expected, normal, and a certainty. Improve or die.
Impossible to argue with you here. I just fail to see how this is more or less brutal than direct wealth theft. I disagree with the notion of financial success being a measure of the greater good. A successful marketer would be one that's good at tricking consumers into thinking their product's value is greater than it actually is. Selling a turd for $1 million. Bonus points if you can lobby to make mind control legal. That all takes time and talent. But last time I checked, bending or breaking the truth isn't a common virtue. Same for drugs, whoever can cook the most addictive stuff stands to make the most profit. That takes time and talent, right? Yes, these are extreme examples. But it's to illustrate that success doesn't have to be ethical. They're both real examples, by the way. Still waiting on the mind control.
Quote:
The envy and hatred of people who succeed is what is driving UBI. Not virtue or care. It is simple hatred and envy of people who are good, just for being good. And that hatred ultimately is a projection. Of hatred for self for not living up to what should be rational expectations. That is also the reason for the hatred of capitalism. Again, projected hate because one does not measure up to being the person they should have been.
Much of the UBI arguments are based in irrational emotions and psychopathology. Not economics. Because if you just look at the facts and the economics, you see that no system has ever produced magnificence that even comes close to that produced by capitalism.
There's definitely some element of that going on. There's also hatred of jumping through hoops to support your existence. But hey, that's life in the circus, right? We also probably disagree on "rational expectations" and "what people should have been", but that's fine.
And that last part isn't true. Dictators of old have resulted in some magnificent palaces. And some of the greatest wonders of the world have been collectively built for some stupid, imaginary god. Run me the numbers, and tell me if that makes economic sense. Although, I guess it makes sense as thunderbolt insurance
Forced relocation to work camps? You're not merely a socialist, you're a full-fledged communist.
I'm just old enough to remember when citizenship came with responsibilities. It's too bad nobody drafted you and shipped you off to Vietnam. If you didn't like fighting, you could do two years alternative service in the Peace Corps or VISTA. You just want to mooch off of a country that others are building and running.
I keep seeing people both on the conservative side of the spectrum and the middle complain that Universal Basic Income (UBI) would not work out. The fact is I see it works out far better than the unemployment stimulus. Unemployment has a large backlog in many states especially for those that submitted at the begining of the shutdowns. Then you have the various donut holes of unemployment. Also unemployment has three more months of federal funding and some states are running dry.
What is your reason why you do or do not like UBI? If not, how do you fix unemployment?
Shocked that a liberal doesn't understand basic economics.
The "U' in UBI means universal, so you are automatically included!
Why in the world would you design a system that depended on perpetual motion to run? "Universal" means whatever you want it to mean. By my definition, it means that everyone has at least a minimum income, but no maximum. A basic income is food, shelter, and clothing. No $7 lattes. No steaks. No movies. OTA TV. Wifi at the library, a basic flip phone, and no data plan. If you can afford more, you don't need a handout. If you want more, go find a job.
Quit with your stupid straw man arguments. A UBI does not give money to everyone, it guarantees everyone a basic income. If your income exceeds basic, you get nothing.
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.
