I saw one guy was proposing $1000 a month per adult. That’s $2k in my household with no debt to spend it on. I’m getting a Ferrari or something with it and the plates are gonna say “yours”.
I don't get the logic that says that if you pay people to do nothing then they will be incentivized to do something.
Earlier in the thread I posted two links. One was why/how large scale UBI would work if implemented. The second was why the Finland plan was doomed to failure from the start. I’m not necessarily a proponent of UBI, but I can see the logic in it. It will not work without MAJOR changes in our society and the government. There would have to be a significant shift to smaller government, more reliance on market forces, and a willing contribution of funds from the upper class.
That’s not how it works. Will you PLEASE read the link I posted previously before making another ignorant ass post?
"The theory is that if everyone gets a check from the government every month then there is less stress on finances. That reduced stress helps people to find more motivation, work harder and be more productive." Maybe you should read your own shit.
Dump it into whores, duh. So you think that the whores will take it and build the next Amazon or Foolbook? Maybe they could hire a proctologist to help you find your head.
So, what do you propose we do when the current trends reach their endgame and we're left with two classes - the ultra rich and the destitute? Do you realize how close we are to that at this very moment? How many people do you know that truly have assets that exceed their liabilities? How many of those people wind up being drained at the ends of their lives due to medical bills and estate taxes? How much of the "wealth" of the middle class is actually imaginary money in a retirement fund that could disappear at the drop of a hat or in a house whose value could drop with another housing bubble burst?
All of it I would assume. The UBI is supposed to reverse the trend that results in my endgame scenario. It's an effort to inject REAL money back into the economy. Not printed money, not debt, real money, that's currently (and yes, I know how insanely Marxist/Leninist this sounds and it pains me to type it) hoarded away by the 1% and effectively out of the reach of normal folks because the people pulling the strings will not let the market make the corrections that would naturally redistribute the wealth from time to time.
Legit middle class? Not much. But then again ... LOOK OUT!!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!! Dude, we aren’t even close to that at this very moment. There is still a very large, thriving middle class in this country. You do realize you’re posting your doom & gloom scenarios to an entire forum of guys that fall almost exclusively into that very large middle class, right?
Realize how close? Hell I wrote it. But the "problem", if you can call it that is not that the down trodden are just somehow getting poor. There are far more opportunities for people in the USA than 50 years ago or more. The PROBLEM is that the great mass of population is drunk on the ideas that they are owed something for nothing because that is what the left has been preaching from the pulpit of government schools for so long. Back to your article where it talks about reducing stress, people today have to manufacture stress compared to folks in the 1920's. The point is that those people had no safety net unless it was from their church or the kindness of others. If people wanted to get out of the hole, they had to climb out by their own resourcefulness. I grew up in rural BFE and I talked to many an old timer, all of which claimed that THEY had to find ways to survive. That's motivation and the necessary resourcefulness that comes from HUNGER. The real inequality is that the motivated folk in our USA society are forging ahead with new knowledge and technology. The hopelessly unmotivated cannot do the most simple things in life, things that folks in the 20's could easily do, such as raise their own garden. The result is that the stupid and unmotivated get more stupid and unmotivated while the others continue to build. What's the answer? Well, I think that your $1,000 per month would satisfy the rabble for a while. Then it becomes $2,000, and then $3,000. The puppeteers will soon enough find that there is not enough productive output to carry and ever increasing cost of muffling a revolt. But this is all just a nothing burger. Everybody knows that our country is drunk on deficit spending. Top democrats have said that this spending can continue forever. Republicans know that it is not true but they are invertebrates. The chicken is going to come home to roost one day. And when it does, those of us still around when the dust settles will laugh at the idea of a UBI.
Yes, I'm one of them. But I look around at my neighbors and peers, and almost all of them are BURIED in debt and would lose virtually everything if the market corrected or if their debts came to call. Not to mention healthcare costs.
If they are buried in debt, what do they have to lose? A negative net worth is always better in bankruptcy, that's what it's for.
Are there? Don't say "go to college" because saddling yourself with a mountain of debt before you even get a job isn't going to help. Start a business? How's that going to work through the myriad of regulations, licenses, and other startup costs? For a moment, please stop focusing on the bottom 10%. The lazy, stupid people will always exist and NOTHING will ever motivate them to improve their situation (this might be more like 20%). But what about that middle 60-80%? What would the economy be like if all of those people were freed up just a bit to take risks, innovate, and most of all, spend REAL money instead of buying everything beyond necessities on credit?