It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There's an important social reason incomes aren't rising in America

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Who pays for the UBI? And when capital flees elsewhere, what happens next?




posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: loam
I can't think of anything more horrific for economic policy. Assuming a UBI would work and also produce the result you say (points I don't think would work), you've just killed an enormous driver for innovation, short circuiting any possibility that the labor markets reorganize in a way that adapts to the automation.


How would it kill innovation? There's still a lot of individual profit to be made under a UBI.

A UBI makes a lot of sense, and wouldn't even be that expensive. It would require a tax increase, but not a very large one. Remember that we could take all current welfare programs and roll them into a UBI.

If we were to create a UBI of $15,000 per year for everyone age 18 or older. Currently that's about 225 million people, so we would be looking at needing 3.375 trillion per year. Current entitlement spending comes to approximately 2.8 trillion, all of which could be rolled over to UBI instead, as once you have UBI there's not really a reason for Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, SSI, etc... as you're presumably getting an income for all this stuff already. So really, all we have to do is come up with about 600 billion to make such a program solvent. If we were to cut the defense budget in half... which would be reasonable, we would have $300 billion left to go. $300 billion out of what's currently 4 trillion in tax revenue, means that a small tax bump would cover the rest... about 5%.

It's completely doable, and creates an alternative for people besides working... especially working dead end jobs.

If we implemented this alongside removing minimum wage (the justification for minimum wage would no longer exist), then I bet you would see a lot of currently dead end jobs start becoming actual viable career paths for people because simply being a motivated employee would once again have value. Those who don't want the jobs would get out, and if an employer wanted an employee they could pay a rate that someone finds fair.



I think what people don't understand is that we already have a UBI of sorts. The most impoverished people in 1st-world society still has access and rights to things they wouldn't have 100 years ago.

Upping that minimum standard of how we treat the least among us is overdue. It's in the freakin' bible, for crying out loud.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Aazadan

Who pays for the UBI? And when capital flees elsewhere, what happens next?


That's besides the point



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Abysha

The real benefit we will see from this is going to come from what eventually everyone does with their free time

The only way society will find happiness will be from within themselves


I don't have high hopes there, but I guess you just need to figure out where you think the country should fall on the spectrum.

Some countries have the philosophy that the most important thing in life is to be comfortable and happy, and they have national policies that try to provide that for all of their citizens.

Other countries have the philosophy that the most important thing in life is high performance, and they push people much more, for things like higher wages and higher test scores, at the expense of happiness.

I'm not really sure which one is best, I don't think it's possible to have both in the same country because of the power dynamics at play. It's a question we're going to have to figure out as a nation at some point. Lead in misery vs exist in bliss.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

What's important is happiness

What your question highlights is who's happiness



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Aazadan

Who pays for the UBI? And when capital flees elsewhere, what happens next?


Taxes pay for it. Just as they do now. The only difference is that we get to streamline the entire process.

Capital wouldn't flee elsewhere due to an UBI. You suggest that as a scenario, but you don't really explain why. Taxes would remain relatively neutral (business taxes in particular), while the customer base would broaden. The only real difficulty would be in finding employees, but even that can be spun as a positive because such a system would also automatically filter out the bad employees you don't want... since they would just choose to not work.

In fact, to give you an example of how easy it would be to streamline a UBI, back during the Presidential Campaign, Ted Cruz accidently suggested we move to a UBI as our tax system where we would move to a consumption tax, and then mail everyone a rebate check each month to basically exempt the first $x collected from them in tax. Scale the numbers up slightly, and that's 100% a UBI implementation.



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Such a policy would be a globalists' dream.

So in addition to my questions above, how do you avoid locking people into generations of marginal subsistence?

How do you avoid the likely inflationary consequence of a UBI?



edit on 3-9-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2017 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam

So in addition to my questions above, how do you avoid locking people into generations of marginal subsistence?

How do avoid the likely inflationary consequence of a UBI?


They could get, and hold, a job. It would be easier than it is today. It would simultneously bring down the barrier to entry on many jobs while also removing competition.

Subsistence would be easy to avoid.

Also, there wouldn't be inflation. There would be no more money in the system than now, except people would be more able to spend it. Spending doesn't create inflation as it increases the velocity of money. It's only when the velocity slows that demand for money subsides (because people sit on more, and have nothing to buy) and inflation begins.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Could and would are two different things. If everyone suddenly has this new cash, how do you prevent sellers of goods and services from raising prices to match what the market can bare? Moreover, you haven't explained how you would prevent capital from fleeing?

Are we going full Soviet here?


edit on 3-9-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 12:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Abysha

The real benefit we will see from this is going to come from what eventually everyone does with their free time

The only way society will find happiness will be from within themselves



That's our destiny, baby!

All this # we're doing for the past hundred years and the next fifty or so is nothing other than prepping for a new system.

I can't wait to see what the world looks like when I'm an old lady, uploaded into some machine, judging all the peasants from my cloud of judgement. Future is gonna be awesome.



you're an optimist . that's awesome 🤘



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Playing the "What would I do game", let's play this out...

I'm a business guy and suddenly UBI becomes law. Instantly, I'm confronted with much higher taxes. If I plan to stay and play, I simply pass on the expense to the consumer. Prices rise and suddenly UBI is meaningless. The only way to stop that is to pass a law limiting my earnings. Once you do that, I'll stop playing here and take my money where I don't have that problem. So you'll have to pass another law that prevents me from leaving. Once you've done that, it's full Soviet after that.

Thanks, but no thanks.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 12:59 AM
link   
That's hilarious. Wonder if he stopped to realize that this is the same generation that can't go 2 minutes without social networking. Did he even proofread what he was writing? What a tool.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: ventian
That's hilarious. Wonder if he stopped to realize that this is the same generation that can't go 2 minutes without social networking. Did he even proofread what he was writing? What a tool.


Hah! No doubt!

By default, we are the most "networked" humans that has ever existed.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: loam
Playing the "What would I do game", let's play this out...

I'm a business guy and suddenly UBI becomes law. Instantly, I'm confronted with much higher taxes. If I plan to stay and play, I simply pass on the expense to the consumer. Prices rise and suddenly UBI is meaningless. The only way to stop that is to pass a law limiting my earnings. Once you do that, I'll stop playing here and take my money where I don't have that problem. So you'll have to pass another law that prevents me from leaving. Once you've done that, it's full Soviet after that.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Ya it seems we just lose value the whole length. At least on Earth. Maybe selfishness has been eliminated.

Star Trek always made it simple. We got our s*** in order, but the aliens didn't. Utopia flees in terror from the Borg, or fights desperately. Not so utopian after all, with so much fleeing and fighting.

Makes me think of this:

edit on 9/3/2017 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 04:23 AM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

I agree,I used to work at a warehouse in Calif,kids show up for work in a new car wearing expensive clothes,800 cell phones,and after just 2 hrs on break,most would say"I didn't know I'd get dirty and sweaty,seems the government has done a good job of teaching kids to escape reality,and to turn males into runway models,where does it all end,kids can't take care of themselves it seems,I had my own apt at 18,I went to college and worked,I did ok,it was a struggle at times,.but those were lessons in life,things don't go your way



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 06:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
When the average American spends roughly 1-2 hundred dollars a month on their cell phone service not including the few hundred dollars a year that people waste because i need the coolest model, it's not that surprising that your generation is broke.


Having a smartphone means you can subscribe to job listing newsboards, receive notifications, send off your resume within seconds of receiving an email. It replaces the need to be chained to a desktop PC in order to receive interview offers. Finding a job is now that competitive.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 07:10 AM
link   
so, the generation of twitter, facebook, who practically live attached to their electronic devices isn't networked enough???
sorry, but this seems to be one of the lamest, most nonsensical excuse I've heard.
100-200 cellphone service....
really? my son currently has three jobs, and still he is barely making ends meet. his cell, which is the only phone service he has, costs him a whopping $30/month! for some reason, I don't think it's his cellphone that is the problem! and, he's far from lazy, he's usually working two to three jobs, or he is mowing lawns in his free time. he'd love to go to college, but no so badly that he's willing to put himself so far into debt that he can't get out. he'd rather have a job in manufacturing, but it seems all of those are hired through temp agencies and those long bouts of unemployment is hell on him! all in all, he makes out better with his one or two or three $9 hour jobs in the convenience stores in the long run.

open your ears and hear what these kids are saying!! our economy isn't allowing them to follow the same path through life as we did. they are finding it hard to stand on their own, they can't marry with confidence that they will ever support a family, buying a home is only a dream. or at least a lot more of them can't..
and that is affecting the entire economic spectrum!



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

and yet, I have one son spending sometimes over ten hours working in crap, coming home smelling like sh..t... happy that he was given a chance in a plumber's apprenticeship.... and I have two other sons who would jump at any similar opportunity!!!



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

The problem is that if you push businesses too far in terms of collective bargaining, they simply off shore your job or they find ways to hire illegal labor. Either way, it undercuts the union idea of pushing wages up forever.

Then on the other end, you have the social contract state telling us we need to collective ever more things through government pushing our taxes ever higher for everyone throughout the economy.

People get squeezed on both ends leaving no room for them personally in their free income to either be stupid with it or frugal.



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
I think a UBI is doable & will probably be needed as automation increases. If we got rid of all the federal welfare programs, federal healthcare programs & federal education programs, that money could be used on a UBI. If we place some restrictions on it, like, only those who are a US citizen, over 18 years old & who don't receive a government pension, each person could receive $20k-$30k per year UBI, without raising taxes. The minimum wage could be ended & people would be deincentivised to have kids in order to receive welfare & be incentivised to have 2 parent households, which might restore some family values. People could then use this money on food, housing, healthcare, education, etc. In the free market. Also, people would not have to live in cities, which can help rejuvenate rural areas. None of this will probably ever happen because it would eliminate the racketeering done by the croni-capitalist run federal government.

www.zerohedge.com...
edit on 3-9-2017 by JBIZZ because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join