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.
Alaska basic income is 900 dollars, you can't live on that and for the government it is not that much.
Sure, if you have a 5K basic income and remove all of those programs then it won't lead to high inflation and it won't lead to high taxes. But, some people will not get their needs covered while others will get money they don't need.
But many basic income supporters have talked about having a basic income of 18K per person. Then you will start having a problem because you can't increase wages by redistributing money around. A family of 3 who earns 100K (75K after taxes) should earn less, not more after this reform. But he already receives 54K from the government. If he earns 65K after the reform then he will have to pay 89% in taxes. Those kind of taxes will make people stop working, do fewer hours or choose a less demanding job.
are they talking about 18k per person within a household...so a family of 6 (two parents and four kids) would get ...108k....?????
if so where is all this money coming from...because to give 18k to everyone (320 million people) is 5.76 trillion dollars....our revenue is only 2.7 trillion
Last edited by workingclasshero; 11-29-2014 at 05:17 AM..
Alaska basic income is 900 dollars, you can't live on that and for the government it is not that much.
Sure, if you have a 5K basic income and remove all of those programs then it won't lead to high inflation and it won't lead to high taxes. But, some people will not get their needs covered while others will get money they don't need.
But many basic income supporters have talked about having a basic income of 18K per person. Then you will start having a problem because you can't increase wages by redistributing money around. A family of 3 who earns 100K (75K after taxes) should earn less, not more after this reform. But he already receives 54K from the government. If he earns 65K after the reform then he will have to pay 89% in taxes. Those kind of taxes will make people stop working, do fewer hours or choose a less demanding job.
Alaska does not have a "basic income". Geeze.
That money is part of the royalty fees for oil that is pumped out of the ground. By law, it belongs to the LEGAL RESIDENTS of Alaska. It is not a basic income guarantee, nor is it redistribution from one Alaskan to another.
This was not much, only a statement with no arguments. Do you think that is enough, or is your focus right now to not lose face? He writes
"First in the long run there is a proportionality between growth and inflation, i.e when money growth increases by x% inflation also rises by x%."
That is clearly not the same as this formula.
P = MV / Q
Where it proportional to money supply times velocity divided by quantity of goods and services produced.
In fact he said "The instability in the velocity of money goes against the theory" So even the guy you linked to, disagrees with you. Are you now going to admit you were wrong? Or are you too afraid to lose face to admit it?
It is true that the quantity theory captures some basic truths. These are as follows: (1) a long-run, sustained price inflation does need a growing money supply to sustain it;
He's a dullard. Just another moron who doesn't understand Inflation.
When Demand exceeds Supply, the price of that commodity increases.
That has absolutely nothing to do with Money Supply. It is an issue that is separate and apart from the Money Supply. Demand pulls the price up...that's why it's called Demand-pull Inflation. The Laws of Economics move to protect the commodity from continue over-consumption up to and including total depletion of the commodity.
It is impossible to sustain Demand-pull Inflation by increasing the Money Supply.
The Money Supply cannot in any way, shape or form affect the Supply or the Demand of that commodity undergoing Demand-pull Inflation.
Assume $1 = 0.80 Euros
Assume WTI is $100/barrel.
1 Barrel WTI = $100 or 80 Euros
Assume Demand-pull Inflation drives up the price to $120/barrel.
1 Barrel WTI = $120 or 96 Euros
Increase the Money Supply by 5%.
1 Barrel WTI = $126 or 96 Euros
Why? Because now $1 = 0.76 Euros
Let me show how dumb that idiot really is.
You have 5 cows and one gallon of milk costs one 6-month old hen or a bucket of corn.
One of your cows is eaten by rats, so you have 4 cows, but the Demand for milk remains unchanged so that now it costs two 6-month old hens or two buckets of corn.
Did the Hen Supply or Corn Supply increase? No.
The point is that Demand-pull Inflation exists with or without money, and is not influenced by the Money Supply in any way, shape or form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
If you increase the transaction speed, then you will end up with inflation in the long run. That means you made a mistake, and it is time for you to admit it.
Correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
There are multiple of factors that lead to inflation. The quantity of supply isn't the only one.
What kind of Inflation?
When you learn, get back to us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Do you know how much of the USD is in circulation, not only in the country but across the world?
Yeah, why don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
In order for me to have any meaningful debate with you, you actually have to know what you're talking about.
So, when are you going to learn?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Who is going to pay for the basic income?
The Basic Income Pumpkin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
But where will people get income to consume these luxuries when their jobs have been replaced by automation?
Who says they are entitled to consume those luxuries?
The Laws of Economics answer your question. Just as soon as you learn Economics, you'll know the answer and won't need to ask novel questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
I directed you to a source, and you want an explanation from me?
Proof Surrogate Substituting a distracting comment for a real proof.
You're stalling because you don't understand what you read.
I can teach a parrot to *** "Basic Income" over and over. That does not mean the parrot knows what Basic Income is.
Most posters would prefer that you find one of the 17 US government websites that you're having such a tremendous difficulty finding to prove your claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
I love how when I comment about meaningless insults, Mircea is quick to demonstrate his inability to actually have a reasoned conversation. Thank you for your demonstration.
Did you find any one of the 17 US government websites or not?
It's a simple question.
What's the problem? Are you afraid?
You'll have an easier time finding those websites just as soon as you learn the difference between Income and Wealth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Mircea, where are you getting your silly math equations from?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Why don't you know?
I know why you don't know.....because you are incredibly misinformed.
I don't want you to hurt your back moving the goal-posts, but the claim is that Basic Income will replace Welfare.
You have no freaking idea how much Welfare actually costs. The problem with lying is that you start believe your own lies. I gave you fact-based data, that I rounded down for demonstration purposes.
The Left Wing always lies and suppresses evidence, like you do.
"The poor only have $12,000 income."
Yes, $12,000 plus anywhere from $22,000 to $100,000 or more in non-cash benefits, depending on familial status and in which one of the 1,539 separate economies they live.
So, you're going to take some bimbo with three kids who gets $9,000 cash from her job plus $72,000 in non-cash benefits and give her what, $18,000 in Basic Income?
Hello?
Are you kidding?
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
What? lol
Proof Surrogate Substituting a distracting comment for a real proof.
So, you're going to take some bimbo with three kids who gets $9,000 cash from her job plus $72,000 in non-cash benefits and give her what, $18,000 in Basic Income?
Are you going to answer the question or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
You have an archaic understanding of national finance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
I got my BAs in Economics and Political Science in this Century.
That's hardly "archaic."
I even paid my own way, unlike the ignorant slugs who buried themselves in debt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
What does this have to do with you not knowing how federal government expenditure works?
I won't even address your last statement.
It has everything to do with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
You and I are probably the youngest ones in this thread, and the hostile comments are all coming from Baby Boomers. How ironic is that?
I'm not a Boomer.
You were wrongly implying that those who attended university in the 1970s and 1980s have archaic knowledge.
I already had one undergraduate degree. I went back this Century to get two more.
And naturally, you think you're entitled, so the fact that anyone can get a degree and not be buried in GSLs is appalling to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Treasury bonds are merely financial instruments. They don't fund spending.
That $680 Billion deficit was sold as treasury securities to get money to pay the monies the government owes.
That $680 Billion is what increases both the federal debt and the so-called "Public Debt."
Did you already forget about the federal government shutdown?
Why was it shut-down?
Because of the "debt-ceiling."
The shut-down forced the government to cease all deficit spending.
Why? Because any accumulated monthly deficits could not be sold as treasury securities.
Why? Because the increase the debt to a level greater than that authorized by Congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
When domestic and foreign entities stop buying US treasury securities --- regardless of the reason why they choose to stop buying them, you have a serious economic problem.
If you think you're going to just triple, quadruple, quintuple the Money Supply and everything will be peachy, you're living in a fantasy word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
For the last time, BI doesn't "triple" the money supply.
Misrepresentation If the misrepresentation occurs on purpose, then it is an example of lying. If the misrepresentation occurs during a debate in which there is misrepresentation of the opponent’s claim, then it would be the cause of a straw man fallacy.
I said absolutely nothing about Basic Income.
What happened when the debt-ceiling was reached?
This happened:
When domestic and foreign entities stop buying US treasury securities --- regardless of the reason why
Domestic an foreign entities could not buy US treasury securities.
Why? Because the Treasury Department was prohibited by Public Law from selling them.
Why? Because you had reached the debt-ceiling.
Why didn't Obama sign an Executive Order instructing the Treasury Department to increase the money, by printing more money in lieu of selling treasury securities?
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
And increasing money supply doesn't cause inflation.
Yes, it does. Do the math.
Oh, that's right.....you can't do the math, because you don't know anything about Economics. Economics is expressed in mathematical formulas, not just words on paper.
Quote:
Another way to close a budget gap is for the Federal Reserve to "print" another $100 billion or so, but that can lead to inflation. Imagine there were the same amount of stuff in the world, but suddenly everyone had twice as much money: The price of everything would simply double, and no one would be any better off.
No reputable economist is of the notion that the federal debt is a problem.
No True Scotsman This error is a kind of ad hoc rescue of one’s generalization in which the reasoner re-characterizes the situation solely in order to escape refutation of the generalization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey
Yeah, that's why he's an actual Economics PhD and not some "Mr. Think I know it all" with an economics BA on some internet forum.
I have a PhD, also. What of it?
PhDs can be wrong. Many often are.
In spite of his having a PhD, he's long on words and short on numbers.
Do you know how much of the USD is in circulation, not only in the country but across the world?
No, and neither do you.
Nor anyone.
We have printed and unprinted dollars. We have dollars created by banking accounting. We have dollars created by borrowing from the Fed. We have dollars created by the inflation of the price of assets.
Can you account for those dollars?
No.
Ask the government how much currency there is, and it'll tell you there's only about a trillion dollars in currency. It makes no effort to quantify electronic or implied dollars at all.
That should scare the hell out of you.
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.
"The poor only have $12,000 income."
