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.
It would be a check for perpetuity. Every single year, a check would be cut to every single household that qualifies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
Will those in places with a very high COL get the same as those in places with a low COL?
If you are receiving a check that is supposed to cover your living expenses, you arent geographically dependent. The taxpayer should not have to subsidize people who refuse to work, but want to live in NYC or Washington DC. If the taxpayer is paying your rent, you live in Wichita, KS or Jackson, MS. Beggers cant be choosers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
What constitutes a household? Would roommates sharing a house have to share the check?Would families with two houses get two checks? Would a 20-year-old living with his mother be part of her household? What if he's 35? If his gf moved in, how many now? And if they had a baby? If a family takes in Great-grandma, will she lose her money? Two sisters living together, each with a teenaged daughter, each of whom has a baby? An unmarried couple has a child but live apart. Two households? But if they live together, one? What if they live together as roommates but aren't "together"? Can a couple separate just in time to receive two checks, and reconcile as soon as the checks arrive? The actual number of households would be much higher than your estimate once money is attached.
Maybe the answer to this is base the check on two tiers. The first would be based on your living arrangement, and the second would be for other expenses. Every household would receive the housing expense check, but every person would receive a check for other expenses.
After the 2nd kid, no more checks will be issued for minor kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
What will be the safety net for those who squander their check within a couple months and can't buy food for the rest of the year? Will their children be taken from them?
No safety net for parents, kids get taken away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
How much say will the government have in how the money is spent?
None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
How will you cover the actual difference between the $20,000 and the needs of those depending on the system? You're saying, take the money that is providing for X people and spread it out among more people but in a different form, and somehow it will become more money.
It will be about the same money. It will take 2.2 trillion to run this program, and we currently are spending about 2 trillion on all forms of welfare right now (including SS and medicare). If you cut out people making over 80k from the program, the current welfare expenditure would cover this program.
Where the big difference is, is that youd be getting rid of 100% of the waste, middle men and beauracracy involved in these programs, which is eating up tremendous amounts of the total outlays.
Additionally, it would depend on shifting direct medical expenses off the government, which are now accounting for about 1 trillion of the total welfare expenses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
Apart from armed revolution, how would you get rid of federal pensions? Aren't those who are looking forward to the pensions the same ones making the decisions?
1. For the most part federal pensions would be replaced with the 20k. For anyone with a pension over 20k, we would have to continue to pay that, but we would immediatley end additional federal pensions as a perk.
2. If you think that any of our elected officials are dependent on federal pensions, you are kidding yourself. Most of them are millionaires when they get in office, and even bigger millionaires when they leave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
And a disagreement on the cost of college: The main reason for the increase in the cost of college is the availability of student loans.
Why are there so many student loans? Because of so many students wanting to go to school. Essentially, if student loans were tightened, it would restrict people going to school, reduce the demand for college, and shrink the college costs. You are saying exactly what I am, just attacking it from the supply side rather than the demand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
I wonder: What will people do with all their time? Where will they get the satisfaction that comes from working?
Ive never had a day of satisfaction from working a job, and Im sure a great number of people never have either.
Instead, people will be free to pursue exactly what they want to do. Creative, volunteer and leisure activities
Ive never had a day of satisfaction from working a job, and Im sure a great number of people never have either.
Instead, people will be free to pursue exactly what they want to do. Creative, volunteer and leisure activities
Some continue to tout this idea under the guise of "taking care" of those who can't take care of themselves. You are clear as to your reason for supporting this idea. You'd rather not work and want a way to live without the confines of having a job.
Some continue to tout this idea under the guise of "taking care" of those who can't take care of themselves. You are clear as to your reason for supporting this idea. You'd rather not work and want a way to live without the confines of having a job.
Thank you for your honesty.
Why is it that people like you lack the ability to separate ideas from their creators? Why is it that its impossible for you to comprehend a person supporting something who has no intention of directly benefiting from it?
I made 20k before as an adult on my own. I wouldnt care to live at that lifestyle again. Thanks. On that same note, I do not think anyone should be enslaved to working at a menial job far beneath their skill level, and far beneath a living wage, simply to have any income at all, nor do I think people who cant find suitable employment, should have to patch together charity and government handouts, both of which they have to jump through hoops for, to eek out a minimal existence.
We might as well just hand them the money to start with, cut out the middle man, and improve the overall health, quality of life and stability of those who remain in the workforce.
Another idea I had was what if we gave everyone who was under the poverty line $10,000 a year.That is a decent amount of money yet is not enough to live on so people would still have to work. That would mean that someone making $15,000 a year would actually be making 25,000 and be above the poverty level.
Another idea I had was what if we gave everyone who was under the poverty line $10,000 a year.That is a decent amount of money yet is not enough to live on so people would still have to work. That would mean that someone making $15,000 a year would actually be making 25,000 and be above the poverty level.
If Tom was making $100 above the poverty level, and Sam was making $100 above it, would you give Tom the money but not Sam, so that Tom's income would be $9,800 more than Sam's? Or would you just bring everyone up to a certain level?
And if you supplement everyone's income so that they make up to a certain level, would you do it whether or not they work? Whether they work part time or full time? Only for self-supporting adults, or for 18-year-olds living with their parents, too?
Lots of details to work out. It's hard to make a perfect world.
4. With the reduction in people in the workforce, wages will go up for people who are working, and requirements will go down to get those jobs.
but if the wages go up, then surely the cost of products and services will go up too!
this would completely devalue the worth of the 'basic income', or would at least create a two tier system of have and have nots - which is what we are trying to avoid anyway.
Where the big difference is, is that youd be getting rid of 100% of the waste, middle men and beauracracy involved in these programs, which is eating up tremendous amounts of the total outlays.
How exactly will you be getting rid of 100% of the beauracracy anyway as the system will still have to be administered?
Quote:
Instead, people will be free to pursue exactly what they want to do. Creative, volunteer and leisure activities
that is assuming that there are actually any staff working in any of these leisure facilities.
If so many people are not working, who is going to clean the toilets, staff the swimming pools and sweep the floors of these places?
Imagine you awaken in a world where everyone is credited with 66 billion quatloos - a substantial sum - in their bank accounts. As a newly enriched multi-billionaire, one might kick back and plan to have fun, order some take out, go to a theater and watch a play. However, since everyone else is super “rich” no one bothers to go to work, to make food, perform in theaters, and thus the civilization collapses.
The “money mad” people will NOT trade without that abstraction for value - money. And yet, if there was too much (or even enough) money, the goad to acquire money by working for it, would lessen, and reduce the goods and services available.
Thus we come to the first common sense axiom: Prosperity is not wealth. It is not based on the quantity of money tokens. Prosperity is the creation, trade, and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services. Greater prosperity is generated by doing more, with less, so more can enjoy. One can generate prosperity without money, but money cannot generate prosperity without productive people.
I guess we could all live a basic lifestyle with minimal work perhaps, but I doubt it would be especially pleasant for most.
who would bother to dig ditches, sit in a production line, sweep the floor at Wall-Mart etc.. if they didn't need the money?
some, perhaps, but then the places would likely go out of business anyway.
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.
