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.
You already know the results. Look at any of the multiple welfare programs. Look at the people who are habitually on those programs, smoking crack, shooting heroin, looting walmart, and living the ghetto life. Giving people money whilst thinking it is going to motivate them to rise above the squalor and crime they have chosen as a lifestyle isn't going to help anything. Those folks who live in the hood right now have plenty of programs available too them to get them out. I'm sure some actually take advantage of it, but most don't. They simply sponge and continue with the thug thing as they blame everyone else for their crappy situation. The more you give them, the more they complain about their victimhood and the less they actually do to change it (YES, I know their are exceptions, but that doesn't change the status quo).
UBI could cost less money if it replaces a bunch of government aid programs that all require staff to manage. That's why it won't happen. Bureaucrats are fighting to keep their jobs.
The productive supporting the unproductive is never a good long-term answer to slothfulness. It only breeds more slothfulness. Your existence does not merit my enslavement.
One sector you can do UBI for is retirement pensions for govt workers be it cops, or admin clerks. They put in the time, and did the work serving the community.
Makes no sense to take some of their paychecks, and taxpayers to pay for previous generation pensions, and give to private speculators in hopes returns will be enough like CalPers does.
This version includes diversified revenue sources: oil extraction tax, tech dividend, and automation of bureaucracy.
Please explain why someone receiving $5,000+/month in federal/State welfare benefits would give it up to take $2,000/month.
People will only accept UBI if it is in addition to their current benefits, or if they don't end up on the short end of the stick, meaning UBI makes them worse off, not better off.
260,000,000+ age 18 or older.
At $2,000/month -- which the Welfare Pukes would flatly reject because they'd lose money -- you're looking at $520,000,000,000 or $520 Billion per month.
That's $6,240,000,000,000/year or $6.24 TRILLION per year.
There is no level of taxation that will generate that amount of money.
The "U" in UBI means "Universal" meaning everyone gets it, and if you're going to means-test for it, then by definition it cannot be UBI.
That would be just a big money grab disguised as UBI.
Simple math = /thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
A UBI is inevitable once we get to the point where we can afford it...
That "point" will be never.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Coe
It is an issue of efficient allocation. So much waste by governments and consolidation of wealth by corporations.
Only 3% of US businesses are publicly-traded corporations.
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.
