Let's talk Yang
I'm thinking I can't live on a thousand a month and who the fuck can? What does this do? Does it replace all aid programs?
I heard him say he'd make Amazon pay for it since they don't pay federal tax. I'm pretty sure Amazon spends a shit ton of money to build the evil empire and for years they didn't make any money. They may still not. Bezo's wealth is the paper value of Amazon stock
What does UBI do for America? Thanks in advance
Comments
-
His position is capitalism doesn't start at zero. It recognizes stay at home mother's work or stay at home Dad's. Provides some stability in transition.for teens. Help for shit people can't afford. Taking the proverbial boot off the throat.
I view it as Trump's wall in 16'. It's a differentiator?
His tax is a vat tax on goods which I'm not really a fan of another tax. Amazon doesn't really pay or FB. Hurts poorer people.
He has raised 250k plus in about 16 hours.
-
-
Actually he has raised over 500k.
-
Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests. -
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that. Under his idea, you can’t get both and he theorizes that eventually the vast majority of people would take UBI because there are no preconditions.UW_Doog_Bot said:Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests. -
It says he leaving those recipients with the choice of taking welfare or UBI. Even though most would take UBI, you'd still be leaving the layer of bureaucracy for the retards that stick with welfare.WilburHooksHands said:
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that.UW_Doog_Bot said:Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests.The means to pay for the Freedom Dividend will come from 4 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 but would be ineligible to receive the full $1,000 in addition to current benefits.
Would be much cheaper to just remove that option. -
Hmmm interesting. I watched interviews with him before and he skirted "replacement" of existing benefits. It looks like he's bit the bullet on that and is attempting to sell it as a replacement. *applauseWilburHooksHands said:
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that. Under his idea, you can’t get both and he theorizes that eventually the vast majority of people would take UBI because there are no preconditions.UW_Doog_Bot said:Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests.
If he drops the gun control pandering I might be on the Yangtrain. -
The Throbber despises something for nothing. Leads to slothful behaviors and outcomes.
Compensation should always be tied to milestones, performance or market. You do X, you get Y. You don't like making $25/hour, fine. There is a supply of labor who will, or you're free to take your talents elsewhere for more coin.
What I can buy into is Yang's contention that the technology coming down the pike will be devastating to the unskilled and/or highly repetitive workforce. Truck drivers, forklift operators, any number of jobs that can be replaced by artificial intelligence and/or robotics. It's coming. How fast? Not sure - but it's coming at an ever increasing speed. So now you have market forces at work that will drive the $25 jobs down to $22, down to $20, down to whatever the amortized cost per hour may be for a robot or a kiosk or a driverless thinking machine.....
That said (JBSucks), The Throbber could consider a reasonably long period of re-training income starting along the lines of UBI. The Throbber is fucking rich so he doesn't need a monthly $1000 that's just going to cycle right back out through his increased tax bill and/or VAT approach, because he buys really expensive toys for the G&R Compound. BUT, the Throbber can get behind giving people a handup over a handout (cliche alert) for, say, 3 years of re-training. And it must be in some emerging occupation not going back to school and getting some fucking medieval English literature degree.
And you'd only get ONE 3 year period of re-training allowance - it could even be stepped up the farther into the retraining program one achieved. Take your 3 year life-changing allowance whenever you want. But only one mulligan. That's it. None of this forever 'free' money.
Throbber2020 or at least during @YellowSnow's popularity contest poles.
Edit: Double the re-training allowance for those willing to enter rehab and submit to drug testing regularly. $$$ changes people's behaviors. Might as well get them fully clean and functional for their new cushy jobs at the same time.
-
Its a step in that direction and could ultimately lead to that policy. He’s trying to propose something that is a step in the right direction short term and hopefully ideal longterm. Yang has openly talked about his dislike of government bureaucracy.UWhuskytskeet said:
It says he leaving those recipients with the choice of taking welfare or UBI. Even though most would take UBI, you'd still be leaving the layer of bureaucracy for the retards that stick with welfare.WilburHooksHands said:
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that.UW_Doog_Bot said:Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests.The means to pay for the Freedom Dividend will come from 4 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 but would be ineligible to receive the full $1,000 in addition to current benefits.
Would be much cheaper to just remove that option. -
The costs would go up under a VAT tax, but as you know Yangs belief is that they wouldn’t do so in any way that would appreciably offset the dividend.jecornel said:His position is capitalism doesn't start at zero. It recognizes stay at home mother's work or stay at home Dad's. Provides some stability in transition.for teens. Help for shit people can't afford. Taking the proverbial boot off the throat.
I view it as Trump's wall in 16'. It's a differentiator?
His tax is a vat tax on goods which I'm not really a fan of another tax. Amazon doesn't really pay or FB. Hurts poorer people.
He has raised 250k plus in about 16 hours.
-
I've liked him for a while so I hope he continues to move that direction. Would be hard to get it to check out without doing that.WilburHooksHands said:
Its a step in that direction and could ultimately lead to that policy. He’s trying to propose something that is a step in the right direction short term and hopefully ideal longterm. Yang has openly talked about his dislike of government bureaucracy.UWhuskytskeet said:
It says he leaving those recipients with the choice of taking welfare or UBI. Even though most would take UBI, you'd still be leaving the layer of bureaucracy for the retards that stick with welfare.WilburHooksHands said:
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that.UW_Doog_Bot said:Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests.The means to pay for the Freedom Dividend will come from 4 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 but would be ineligible to receive the full $1,000 in addition to current benefits.
Would be much cheaper to just remove that option. -
Good stuff. I agree it separates him from the crowd which is smart
When I needed a hand out errrrrrr hand up i would have loved a grand a month and being able to skip the incredible bullshit required to get a couple hundred bucks of food stamps
There has to be a better way to deliver aid. This at least gets the discussion going
How fast would the establishment chew him up and spit him out? Fast I assume -
My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
-
What if the money you were getting was coming from your wife? Still concerned?BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
-
I mean, do you care about how current welfare systems do that?BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
-
Define current welfare systems, then I can ansewer you're quereyUW_Doog_Bot said:
I mean, do you care about how current welfare systems do that?BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
-
The problem with UBI is that it will/would never be replacement for other welfare programs and combined with both the Chamber of Commerce and the leftards love of open borders you can imagine the attraction for an illegal family of 6 to get to the US for $72k a year plus free medical. Giving a meth head or heroin addict $1,000 is just stoking an out of control fire with gasoline and expecting a good result. Hell, if we let employees hire full time employees then at $10 an hour working 4 40 hour weeks a month gets you $1,600. And yet we hear that we need more illegals because $10 an hour jobs aren’t being filled. It shouldn’t be acceptable that able bodied US residents can collect a ton of money for Section 8 housing, Medicaid, free education, food stamps and obamaphones with no work requirements. Then toss in the massive fraud associated with the federal earned income tax credit.
-
WestlinnDuck said:
The problem with UBI is that it will/would never be replacement for other welfare programs and combined with both the Chamber of Commerce and the leftards love of open borders you can imagine the attraction for an illegal family of 6 to get to the US for $72k a year plus free medical. Giving a meth head or heroin addict $1,000 is just stoking an out of control fire with gasoline and expecting a good result. Hell, if we let employees hire full time employees then at $10 an hour working 4 40 hour weeks a month gets you $1,600. And yet we hear that we need more illegals because $10 an hour jobs aren’t being filled. It shouldn’t be acceptable that able bodied US residents can collect a ton of money for Section 8 housing, Medicaid, free education, food stamps and obamaphones with no work requirements. Then toss in the massive fraud associated with the federal earned income tax credit.
-
The Throbber is already depressed about half the time.BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
Porn helps.
-
See my rant about tying to performance.WestlinnDuck said:The problem with UBI is that it will/would never be replacement for other welfare programs and combined with both the Chamber of Commerce and the leftards love of open borders you can imagine the attraction for an illegal family of 6 to get to the US for $72k a year plus free medical. Giving a meth head or heroin addict $1,000 is just stoking an out of control fire with gasoline and expecting a good result. Hell, if we let employees hire full time employees then at $10 an hour working 4 40 hour weeks a month gets you $1,600. And yet we hear that we need more illegals because $10 an hour jobs aren’t being filled. It shouldn’t be acceptable that able bodied US residents can collect a ton of money for Section 8 housing, Medicaid, free education, food stamps and obamaphones with no work requirements. Then toss in the massive fraud associated with the federal earned income tax credit.
Pee in a bottle - $1500.
Don't pee in a bottle - $250.
#racistimsure
-
You watched that porn because you think there's still hope. But Throbber, the only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead, and the sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a MAGAmerican's supposed to function. Without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All Republican economic policy depends on it.PurpleThrobber said:
The Throbber is already depressed about half the time.BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
Porn helps. -
I appreciate the theory behind it, and I think it properly recognizes the role technology has and continues to play in wrecking a lot of our middle class. But I'm generally against a no strings attached handout, and I think the disincentives that come with a free $12k/year are pretty damn high. I'd like to see that money spent on some sort of "re-education" (bad choice of words) or free vocational training for those who won't have a place in the new economy, similar to what the Throbber is saying. Daycare vouchers or other forms of assistance for struggling parents would also be more effective IMO. I honestly don't trust the group that needs the UBI the most to effectively spend that money in a way that truly helps them. I think daddy government still needs to play a role in helping them help themselves.
-
I'll give you respect for at least admitting it. There are large amounts of people that need to be managed by the government in your view.GreenRiverGatorz said:I appreciate the theory behind it, and I think it properly recognizes the role technology has and continues to play in wrecking a lot of our middle class. But I'm generally against a no strings attached handout, and I think the disincentives that come with a free $12k/year are pretty damn high. I'd like to see that money spent on some sort of "re-education" (bad choice of words) or free vocational training for those who won't have a place in the new economy, similar to what the Throbber is saying. Daycare vouchers or other forms of assistance for struggling parents would also be more effective IMO. I honestly don't trust the group that needs the UBI the most to effectively spend that money in a way that truly helps them. I think daddy government still needs to play a role in helping them help themselves.
I'd argue that line of thinking has very similar negative outcomes to a simple free handout.
Let's be clear as well, I'm not talking about the minority of people with mental health issues that need help managing them. -
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
-
Sure, food stamps, housing assistance, medicaid, etc.BearsWiin said:
Define current welfare systems, then I can ansewer you're quereyUW_Doog_Bot said:
I mean, do you care about how current welfare systems do that?BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
All those things that get called corporate welfare when working people use them.
-
The difference is that his incorporate a healthy dose of AI at all, which has a much further possible automation reach industry wise than robots/manufacturing jobs. He also doesn’t believe you can simply just retrain everybody efficiently and realistically.GrundleStiltzkin said:I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
-
Past revolutions have increased productivity in certain sectors (agriculture, manufacturing) to the point where much fewer people are required for them. Past revolutions have tended to create more jobs than they displace - people migrated from farms and rural areas to cities and got jobs in manufacturing, and as manufacturing has become more efficient people have migrated to more service-sector jobs. The concern is that the current/future AI/automation revolution will not create as many jobs as it displaces. What will people do and where will they get their money then become big problems/questionsGrundleStiltzkin said:I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
-
Very little IMO. I think offshoring has done far worse to our labor force than automation is likely to do. If you want some further in depth reading I could probably dig some articles up but I think it falls into the same fallacious arguments previous generations had about automation. Could you imagine explaining to someone from the 50's that professional video game players would be a fairly accessible job in the future?GrundleStiltzkin said:I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
There's an argument to be made that the RATE of automation will increase and create a structural gap of employment. I think we should address that but in a short term fashion.
All that said, I'm still a proponent of UBI as a replacement of welfare. -
Ignoring the impact of legal chain migration and illegal immigration. That has had a huge impact on US wages. Roofing hasn't had much automation. Roofers make far less in 2019 than in 1969. Inflation adjusted.
-
OK, now that we've defined terms a bit, I can respond.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Sure, food stamps, housing assistance, medicaid, etc.BearsWiin said:
Define current welfare systems, then I can ansewer you're quereyUW_Doog_Bot said:
I mean, do you care about how current welfare systems do that?BearsWiin said:My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
All those things that get called corporate welfare when working people use them.
The list you provided is a reactive set of welfare systems - people aren't getting what they need, so the govt. helps them. Yang's proposal is proactive, giving everybody something whether or not they need it. I see it as a much bigger pump-priming than the current systems, which stands to put a shitload more money in consumers' hands, which might stimulate inflation. Employers across all sectors might see that people have a minimum UBI and factor that into their wage scales. Nothing approaching this kind of UBI has ever been attempted on this scale, and I'm not sure we know how the actors in the system will respond to the new rules. By itself, UBI may end up causing some behaviors and outcomes that are neither desired not intended, which is why it would probably have to be accompanied by an attendant set of rules to make sure that people are actually being helped instead of having their purchasing power eroded by other means.
