How do you feel about Andrew Yang's UBI of 1,000 a month for every US Adult

[Spectral]

The principle of greater individual determination over a paternalistic welfare state seems like one that's at least worth trying. In practice, the moment that someone stupidly burns through their funds and has to go without food or shelter, we'd be reinstitution the relevant programs for these. My impression of the actual political economy at play here is that a UBI would simply be a massive expansion of the federal welfare state with little to recommend it.

[Kokolums]

The principle of greater individual determination over a paternalistic welfare state seems like one that's at least worth trying. In practice, the moment that someone stupidly burns through their funds and has to go without food or shelter, we'd be reinstitution the relevant programs for these.

Before the welfare state, it was up to churches to provide care for the poor. They subsisted on donations.

Before central banking in the US, when there was a hard recession, the government would basically beg the wealthy elites to bail out the system in return for favors once the economy got going again. JP Morgan had to bail out the US a few times himself. After the last time JP Morgan did it, he told the US government they needed to set up a fake currency backed by nothing and then create their own banks to print money at will to bail themselves out and stop bothering him. Which is basically what FDR did. Usually when a nation goes fake currency, the government destroys it by promising the voters everything under the sun and then paying for it by printing a ton of cash but somehow the US has avoided that fate so far. I think its because the US has avoided putting a strong man in the white house that can do whatever he wants.

[Shadowferal]

Forms of libertarianism gave us child labor, and slave labor...I see no reason to return to the robber baron era.

[Guy4123]

I'd prefer cost of living decrease by 1k a month instead of giving free money out but out of the two only one is really an actual possibility, so yea if take that money and go buy a house in Texas with a mortgage that less than 1k a month.

[Deletedaccount1]

I can't in good conscience support any new types of federal welfare programs when we are over $20 trillion in debt.

[Shadowferal]

...and yet, you support the moron that put us so much in debt today.

[Orange Joe]

Well, he can give it from his own pocket. Forced charity should stop. I pay taxes for services like security, roads, transportation, health, education, utilities ... that's why taxes are acceptable otherwise it would be straight robbery.

How do you address income inequality? Well, you address the problem, not the symptoms. There is something wrong with our labor laws and trade when there is a huge income disparity. We should fix what's causing that not just spray money over people. It's the most stupid and lazy "solution" proposed so far.

How do you fix there just not being enough jobs for EVERYONE to work?

[shimerra]

How do you fix there just not being enough jobs for EVERYONE to work?

Also love how he personally gets to define what is a service and what is a charity.

[Jonnusthegreat]

I can't in good conscience support any new types of federal welfare programs when we are over $20 trillion in debt.

That's why I don't support the military.

[PC2]

How do you fix there just not being enough jobs for EVERYONE to work?

We create more jobs, more opportunity, more activity, more businesses. We're not anywhere close to any kind of job limit. Let's say there are 3.3 billion jobs in the world now, there's no reason why it can't go up to 3.6 billion, then 4 billion.

There's no deterministic plan which can create them though. It's about constant trial and error.

[Draco-Onis]

Let's say there are 3.3 billion jobs in the world now, there's no reason why it can't go up to 3.6 billion, then 4 billion.

Supply and demand? limit on the amount of people with a specific set of skills? capital expenditure? Are you being serious right now?

[Shadowferal]

Yang's plan seems to have going for it in terms of something more detailed than the wishful thinking that others are clearly unable to delineate.

- - - Updated - - -

Supply and demand? limit on the amount of people with a specific set of skills? capital expenditure? Are you being serious right now?

Just to say that my post directly below yours wasn't referring to you. (but I think you know that anyway)

[Jehct]

^
Watching reactionaries talk what they don't know is always funny, especially if it flatly goes against all historical precedence.

I think UBI will eventually be necessary but for right now. I think its a bit too early. Not enough jobs have been taken away by machines. My question is:

What happens when the UBI has been spent already and the person or people want more? Will UBI be increased to appease the outrage?

I like Yang and think he is one of the better candidates out there but I know he has an idea of "if we pay poor people they won't rise up and kill all the rich"... something like that.

[Orange Joe]

This is exactly what we should address, we should fix our labor and trade laws, our economy and wages to give more jobs to people. We shouldn't spray money over the problem. We should look at the sources and causes of unemployment and not the symptoms.

What you're suggesting would take a miracle. At no point in the history of humanity has there been enough jobs for everyone to be employed.

We create more jobs, more opportunity, more activity, more businesses. We're not anywhere close to any kind of job limit. Let's say there are 3.3 billion jobs in the world now, there's no reason why it can't go up to 3.6 billion, then 4 billion.

There's no deterministic plan which can create them though. It's about constant trial and error.

Cause it's that simple to create more jobs right? Just snap your fingers? I mean if your God Emperor Trump can't make enough jobs who will?

[Shadowferal]

I like Yang and think he is one of the better candidates out there but I know he has an idea of "if we pay poor people they won't rise up and kill all the rich"... something like that.

That's one of the reasons (of many) that FDR came out with the New Deal. "Communism" had a lot of love going for it during the Great Depression. And the wealthy appeared as pure villains. And with Unemployment reaching 25%, the country seemed ripe for another revolution.

[Jehct]

That's one of the reasons (of many) that FDR came out with the New Deal. "Communism" had a lot of love going for it during the Great Depression. And the wealthy appeared as pure villains. And with Unemployment reaching 25%, the country seemed ripe for another revolution.

Ok. How does that apply to now? Why would we need a UBI right now when we have the lowest Unemployment rate ever ( 3.6% ).

[Orange Joe]

The attitude that we can't do anything about unemployment is just basically throwing the whole field of economy and finance in the trash can ... it also makes the problem worse by ignoring it. You're not helping anyone get a job with that attitude. The problem can be solved and countries do have periods of prosperity and high employment rates vs poverty and low employment. If you don't believe that, well the job of fixing employment is not for you then.

I never said you can't do anything. I said there has never in any point in the history of humanity, been enough jobs for everyone to have one. I don't see this ever changing. Smarter people than you or me have been working on this stuff for decades/centuries.

Sure you can lower it, but there will always be some that won't have a job.

[Shadowferal]

Ok. How does that apply to now? Why would we need a UBI right now when we have the lowest Unemployment rate ever ( 3.6% ).

Just because people are forced to work for shitty wages, doesn't mean that they can pay their bills, let alone afford the "American Dream®"
Whereas once upon a time a single minwage job could have at least done as much as get one out of poverty and living reasonably comfortable.

[Orange Joe]

Ok. How does that apply to now? Why would we need a UBI right now when we have the lowest Unemployment rate ever ( 3.6% ).

You do know that only counts people that are still looking for work right? That there are still many more that are unemployed and just gave up looking for whatever reason.

Only 158 million people are employed in the US while our population is over 300 million.....

All healthy people tend to get a job at some point in their lifetime, hence there is no employment problem in the first place. It's natural to have a downtime between jobs, that's why you do savings. Thinking about it, we really don't even have an employment problem. If you don't find work for too long, maybe because you're a loser or a meth head and should try begging people for charity instead. I see no problem that needs solving. People who are worthy will find a way to sort their shit out.

Read above.

[Shadowferal]

Unemployment Is Low, but That’s Only Part of the Story

The problem is that the unemployment rate, which is publicly updated by the Labor Department on the first Friday of every month, is an insufficient statistic, despite all the attention it gets. Sure, it tabulates the number of men and women who are actively job-hunting. But it leaves out the growing numbers who have stopped actively looking.

In the federal government’s scheme of things, those who stop looking for work aren’t listed as unemployed. The Labor Department has a broader monthly statistic that accounts for the dropouts, but it doesn’t get equal billing with the unemployment rate. It is called the labor force participation rate, and if it received the attention that it deserves, then the June job numbers, published and broadcast in early July, would have been stripped of some of the glow they seemed to have.

“You run into the problem of losing economic output when people drop out of work,” said Richard B. Freeman, a labor economist at Harvard and at the National Bureau of Economic Research. “If you are not in school and not in work or actively searching for a job, you are not involved in society, and you are more likely to engage in antisocial activities.”

With the appropriate focus on both the unemployment rate and the labor force participation rate, Americans would be fully aware that while nearly everyone who has actively sought a job recently has one, an awful lot of people aren’t bothering to look at all. Perhaps a spouse is earning enough, or the wages on offer for available jobs are too low, or the commute to an acceptable job is too long, or child-care is too expensive or the working conditions are too difficult.