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

[Shadowferal]

yeah...

"Not helping " isn't "hurting?"

[Endus]

Look at it like this: The concept of putting people to death for crimes is something I agree with. Putting someone to death because they murdered 100 people is vastly different from putting someone to death because they're gay in my books. One I condone, the other is something I define as inhumane. The concept of "putting someone to death" is no less valuable. It's the lines drawn in the sand.

Also, I'm not and will never be about HUNTING people down because I think they deserve to die. I don't presume to know when someone should or shouldn't die. I presume society can tell when it's had enough and no longer wants to support someone, though. If they die as a result of that support withdrawal, that's not society's fault or problem. That was always that person's problem and they were just lucky to get as much support as they did up until they no longer got it and should be thankful for the extra days they got tacked onto their life. "Not helping" is not "hurting" or being responsible for the thing causing the hurt in the first place.

You're still perfectly happy to encourage and continue human suffering. You're just stating you personally won't sully your hands, directly.

That's not really an improvement worth talking about.

[BeepBoo]

Because the world is made of love and peace, and when you break this ideology then it'll backfire onto you. Historically when the rich get too greedy the people with pitchforks and fire come after them

The farther along we get in warfare capability, the less of a risk there is from this type of backlash. It is what it is. One gun in vegas took out 58 people and wounded 400+. Tell me again about how pitchfork people will take back their "birthright."

Usually those with great wealth aren't exactly contributing to society. /snip

A few things to this point:

1) if they have that much money, that just means they did something so valuable to society they earned a near infinite amount of lifetimes of repayment. Nothing wrong here. I'd say the fact that microsoft is so ubiquitous has certainly earned the OG owner a place for his family to get taken care of for the rest of forever, even if they never lift another finger.

Also, apparently "just existing and participating in the econ by buying things" is enough to justify your existence accd to Endus.

2) Getting to the point where your wealth is so high that you are valuable simply by allowing your assets to get used, on loan, by other people so they can attempt to fulfill THEIR desires is still doing work and enabling someone else to get something they want with something you have. The actual labor part isn't important in the least to me.

Those who actually work hard and create the products you use aren't the ones benefiting from the profits they generate. Music artists tend to get the shaft when it comes to selling their music. You don't even know the name of the people who created the hardware in your iPhone, but everyone knows Tim Cooks name like it matters.

I've filed a number of patents that my company owns and reaps probably more benefit than I do simply because I signed a contract saying any idea I come up with is theirs and it's literally my job. Am I being treated unfairly? I don't think so. I would have left or not gone with the job if I felt slighted. They give me things in return I value. I'd hope everyone was in the same boat. Don't fucking do something if you're not okay with it. Being wishy washy or partially committed but still doing the thing is ultimately still you saying you're actually fine with it, even if you aren't 100% happy.

If you want to promote creativity and better living standards then a UBI is currently the best answer. That and public housing, free healthcare, and etc.

I don't care to promote creativity or better standards of living. I only care that society gets to make the choices for what it thinks are the best goals for humanity without gov't interfering on the home front.

[Vash The Stampede]

The farther along we get in warfare capability, the less of a risk there is from this type of backlash. It is what it is. One gun in vegas took out 58 people and wounded 400+. Tell me again about how pitchfork people will take back their "birthright."

So you're saying that because we have deadlier guns then uprisings aren't an issue? I guess the phrase blind and toothless doesn't resonate with you?

1) if they have that much money, that just means they did something so valuable to society they earned a near infinite amount of lifetimes of repayment.

That is rarely the case. Winning the lottery doesn't mean you did something valuable to society, just as much as Jeff Bezos did with Amazon that originally shipped discounted overpriced textbooks. Amazon is so big now they can just buy their way into a market they have no business in.

Nothing wrong here. I'd say the fact that microsoft is so ubiquitous has certainly earned the OG owner a place for his family to get taken care of for the rest of forever, even if they never lift another finger.

So Bill Gates who hardly wrote any of the code for Windows and bought DOS for peanuts has the right to have billions of dollars? He's like what, the second or third richest person in the world? Microsoft is a company that should have been broken up long ago, because of a practice they use known as Embrace, extend, and extinguish.

2) Getting to the point where your wealth is so high that you are valuable simply by allowing your assets to get used, on loan, by other people so they can attempt to fulfill THEIR desires is still doing work and enabling someone else to get something they want with something you have. The actual labor part isn't important in the least to me.

Acting like a bank matters to you but not the act in of itself? We don't need rich people acting like banks, we need them to invest their overwhelming wealth back into the economy as jobs, or as taxes. If they're automating the crap out of jobs then we'll tax them so that our society doesn't crumble due to a lack of consumption. I don't know if you heard but the Federal Reserve just gave up $4 Trillion since September to banks because the repo market is crashing. They literally printed out money to give to rich people and we act like it was no big deal. How's that fair, or good for the economy?

I've filed a number of patents that my company owns and reaps probably more benefit than I do simply because I signed a contract saying any idea I come up with is theirs and it's literally my job. Am I being treated unfairly?

Having a pile of money to invest, doesn't make you valuable. It makes you an unnecessary forced middle man. This is why more people are using KickStarter like services to have others invest in their ideas so they benefit directly from them, and not some giant mega corporation.

I don't care to promote creativity or better standards of living. I only care that society gets to make the choices for what it thinks are the best goals for humanity without gov't interfering on the home front.

So what do you care for anyway? Yourself? Me, Myself, and I?

[Livnthedream]

Yeah but who is paying for this...

It would be easier than you might think. Andrew proposes funding the Freedom Dividend by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value Added Tax of 10 percent. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally – most would prefer cash with no restriction.

A Value Added Tax (VAT) is a tax on the production of goods or services a business produces. It is a fair tax and it makes it much harder for large corporations, who are experts at hiding profits and income, to avoid paying their fair share. A VAT is nothing new. 160 out of 193 countries in the world already have a Value Added Tax or something similar, including all of Europe which has an average VAT of 20 percent.

The means to pay for the basic income will come from four sources:

1. Current spending: We currently spend between $500 and $600 billion a year on welfare programs, food stamps, disability and the like. This reduces the cost of the Freedom Dividend because people already receiving benefits would have a choice between keeping their current benefits and the $1,000, and would not receive both.

Additionally, we currently spend over 1 trillion dollars on health care, incarceration, homelessness services and the like. We would save $100 – 200+ billion as people would be able to take better care of themselves and avoid the emergency room, jail, and the street and would generally be more functional. The Freedom Dividend would pay for itself by helping people avoid our institutions, which is when our costs shoot up. Some studies have shown that $1 to a poor parent will result in as much as $7 in cost-savings and economic growth.

2. A VAT: Our economy is now incredibly vast at $19 trillion, up $4 trillion in the last 10 years alone. A VAT at half the European level would generate $800 billion in new revenue. A VAT will become more and more important as technology improves because you cannot collect income tax from robots or software.

3. New revenue: Putting money into the hands of American consumers would grow the economy. The Roosevelt Institute projected that the economy will grow by approximately $2.5 trillion and create 4.6 million new jobs. This would generate approximately $800 – 900 billion in new revenue from economic growth.

4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: By removing the Social Security cap, implementing a financial transactions tax, and ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom Dividend. We can add to that a carbon fee that will be partially dedicated to funding the Freedom Dividend, making up the remaining balance required to cover the cost of this program.

https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/

[Beefhammer]

Anyone who's not literally a sociopath, or some other mental illness damaging their capacity to empathize with others.

Seriously, lacking empathy is a symptom of mental illness. All by itself. It's not something you should be bragging about as the basis of your viewpoint.



That's not what anyone's talking about. It's a straw man, because you'd rather not deal with the actual point.

We're not arguing against wage stratification. We're arguing against a system that's so wildly separated on that front that lower-income earners are suffering hardship. Set that income floor at a living wage and we can talk, otherwise your viewpoint necessitates and encourages human suffering as a desired outcome.

Hell me and the wife make about $60k combined and we would have no issue paying an extra 5-10% if we knew it would help the poor. Why? Because I'm not a fuck you got mine selfish sociopath.

[Frenegade42]

The sky is blue.
Water is wet.
If you subsidise undesirable behaviour and choices, you will only receive more undesirable behaviour and choices.

[Vash The Stampede]

The sky is blue.
Water is wet.
If you subsidise undesirable behaviour and choices, you will only receive more undesirable behaviour and choices.

He's right you know. We should totally take the undesirable wealthiest money and redistribute it to the poor. Lets see their behavior when they actually have to pay taxes for once.

[CostinR]

How about a "maybe" option for that poll. I think it's worth considering even if I am not sold it's a good idea to follow through on it.

[PC2]

No country is crazy enough to give people $12k per year on 2019 budgets...

Edit: Except maybe the oil rich states.

[Shadowferal]

But we can afford to give billions in corp welfare...and for nothing.

[Moralgy]

I would pay off my student loan much faster since it won't have any problems with inflation.

[jeezusisacasual]

But we can afford to give billions in corp welfare...and for nothing.

Well to be fair that is why Gas prices are far cheaper in the US and why every food product aims to have Corn syrup to reduce cost in a direct or indirect way. I am all for reforming our subsidies and how they applied at which price inflection point but to say Americans are not getting something for them is a bit off. Now one can make the argument that the corporate side of things gains far more then you or I which i would agree but it does keep some products vastly cheaper.

[Vash The Stampede]

Well to be fair that is why Gas prices are far cheaper in the US and why every food product aims to have Corn syrup to reduce cost in a direct or indirect way. I am all for reforming our subsidies and how they applied at which price inflection point but to say Americans are not getting something for them is a bit off. Now one can make the argument that the corporate side of things gains far more then you or I which i would agree but it does keep some products vastly cheaper.

I would think that because America has most of the worlds oil is the reason why gas is cheap. Also most oil in the world is traded with US Dollars because America said so. If gas prices did go up the US industry would suffer, but we could also do many other things. Not drive SUV's, buy electric cars, convert gas cars to use natural gas.

[Beefhammer]

I would think that because America has most of the worlds oil is the reason why gas is cheap. Also most oil in the world is traded with US Dollars because America said so. If gas prices did go up the US industry would suffer, but we could also do many other things. Not drive SUV's, buy electric cars, convert gas cars to use natural gas.

It cheap because the multibillion dollar oil companies get hundreds if millions in subsidies to keep prices low.

- - - Updated - - -

Well to be fair that is why Gas prices are far cheaper in the US and why every food product aims to have Corn syrup to reduce cost in a direct or indirect way. I am all for reforming our subsidies and how they applied at which price inflection point but to say Americans are not getting something for them is a bit off. Now one can make the argument that the corporate side of things gains far more then you or I which i would agree but it does keep some products vastly cheaper.

I'd rather have gas at $5/gal plus. Would get rid of these PoS gas guzzling pickups and SUVs and almost force renewable car tech and much more efficient engines.

[PC2]

I'd rather have gas at $5/gal plus. Would get rid of these PoS gas guzzling pickups and SUVs and almost force renewable car tech and much more efficient engines.

lol you realize that you could just advocate for policy that specifically targets those vehicles. Increasing the price of gas for everyone is like using a hammer when you want a scalpel.

[Shadowferal]

I'd rather have gas at $5/gal plus. Would get rid of these PoS gas guzzling pickups and SUVs and almost force renewable car tech and much more efficient engines.

Thereby driving gas prices way down.

[Beefhammer]

lol you realize that you could just advocate for policy that specifically targets those vehicles. Increasing the price of gas for everyone is like using a hammer when you want a scalpel.

But it would also force other to change bad habits which would reduce old consumption, which is better innthe long run than the short term destructive gains cheap gas provides.

[Endus]

lol you realize that you could just advocate for policy that specifically targets those vehicles. Increasing the price of gas for everyone is like using a hammer when you want a scalpel.

Increasing taxes on gasoline increases the costs for users, which encourages them to make "better" decisions, by bringing the cost differential between this and other options more in-line (or even making other options cheaper overall).

It's explicitly intended to shape consumer decision-making, encouraging people to choose vehicles with better mileage, making fewer/shorter trips, carpooling, giving mass transit another thought, etc. It's not just about gas guzzlers.

[Shadowferal]

pfft...I will buy into Tesla's pickup truck thing after doing my homework (important) and if I see one of these...