Politics 2017 part 4

[Gfted1]

What the hell is "unconditional basic income"?

[Ben No.3]

What the hell is "unconditional basic income"?

Free money from the government every month, funded by taxes

Edited April 6, 2017 by Ben No.3

[Gfted1]

For what? Mere accident of birth?

 

I would like to sign myself and entire family up for this program of free money.

[Ben No.3]

For what? Mere accident of birth?

Yes. Unconditional means unconditional

 

I would like to sign myself and entire family up for this program of free money.

They are testing it in Finnland right now.

[Gfted1]

Yes. Unconditional means unconditional

Kooky.

 

They are testing it in Finnland right now.

Huh, does everyone just quit their jobs then? I know I would!

 

As a side effect, I bet their population will start BOOMING once they realize they can just pump out dependents for free l00t.

[Azdeus]

Free money from the government every month, funded by taxes

I'm more interested in 6 hour days, myself.

[Guard Dog]

You know I would not be opposed to a universal income under a certain condition. Suppose the US decided they are going to pay every American over the age of 18 the equivalent of a full time worker at minimum wage. That would be around $15k per year, $1200 a month give or take. And the US agreed to provide single payer health coverage on all single expenses over say $15k. In other words, need a kidney transplant we'll cover you. Needs stitches? Get out your credit card. And that is it. That is the only two benefits you get from Uncle Sam. No social security, no government guaranteed loans, no food stamps, nothing. What you earn over that you'll be taxed on at the usual rate.

 

Would that be acceptable? Do you guys realize that would be less than we are paying per citizen for all the boondoggles mess we have now? Reason Magazine did a piece on that last year. I'll see if I can find it

[Hurlshort]

Yeah, Dan Carlin, who is a pretty hardcore libertarian, did an episode similar to this recently.

[Gfted1]

I'm more interested in 6 hour days, myself.

Why would you choose to work at all? Give this guy a free life and I'm going to sit on a beach and fish.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Corporate lobbying is mostly about taxes and regulations, not oppressing the worker, except for the part about importing the aforementioned cheap foreign labor.

[Ben No.3]

 

Yes. Unconditional means unconditional

Kooky.

 

They are testing it in Finnland right now.

Huh, does everyone just quit their jobs then? I know I would!

Exactly what they are testing. They gave it to 2000 unemployed people. Now they see how they react

[Hurlshort]

Corporate lobbying is mostly about taxes and regulations, not oppressing the worker, except for the part about importing the aforementioned cheap foreign labor.

 

You keep bringing red herring up. You are very committed, at least.

[Gfted1]

Exactly what they are testing. They gave it to 2000 unemployed people. Now they see how they react

Hmm, Ima go out on a limb here and predict these people will continue to be unemployed.

[Ben No.3]

Corporate lobbying is mostly about taxes and regulations, not oppressing the worker, except for the part about importing the aforementioned cheap foreign labor.

Don't fight your fellow worker, who is willing to work for less than minimum wage to sustain his family. fight the conditions that force the two of you to compete

[Ben No.3]

You know I would not be opposed to a universal income under a certain condition. Suppose the US decided they are going to pay every American over the age of 18 the equivalent of a full time worker at minimum wage. That would be around $15k per year, $1200 a month give or take. And the US agreed to provide single payer health coverage on all single expenses over say $15k. In other words, need a kidney transplant we'll cover you. Needs stitches? Get out your credit card. And that is it. That is the only two benefits you get from Uncle Sam. No social security, no government guaranteed loans, no food stamps, nothing. What you earn over that you'll be taxed on at the usual rate.

 

Would that be acceptable? Do you guys realize that would be less than we are paying per citizen for all the boondoggles mess we have now? Reason Magazine did a piece on that last year. I'll see if I can find it

It appears this forum can come up with some sort of common ground. I have an idea... we all together try outline how "our" state would look like. The thread would be a bloody mess, but I'd be interested to see water we can come up with something Edited April 6, 2017 by Ben No.3

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Corporate lobbying is mostly about taxes and regulations, not oppressing the worker, except for the part about importing the aforementioned cheap foreign labor.

Don't fight your fellow worker, who is willing to work for less than minimum wage to sustain his family. fight the conditions that force the two of you to compete

 

To avoid the conditions that force us to compete they need stay in their own country, unless we invite them in.

 

Well, the filibuster is dead for Supreme Court confirmations. They should get rid of it entirely. It made some sense when the two parties would occasionally come together for the national good, but now that they're always at each other's throats it just contributes to paralysis. To avoid the filibuster they have to pass everything under budget reconciliation rules, which only leads to badly designed, half-baked legislation like Obamacare.

[Ben No.3]

 

 

Corporate lobbying is mostly about taxes and regulations, not oppressing the worker, except for the part about importing the aforementioned cheap foreign labor.

Don't fight your fellow worker, who is willing to work for less than minimum wage to sustain his family. fight the conditions that force the two of you to compete

To avoid the conditions that force us to compete they need stay in their own country, unless we invite them in.

 

Well, the filibuster is dead for Supreme Court confirmations. They should get rid of it entirely. It made some sense when the two parties would occasionally come together for the national good, but now that they're always at each other's throats it just contributes to paralysis. To avoid the filibuster they have to pass everything under budget reconciliation rules, which only leads to badly designed, half-baked legislation like Obamacare.

Hmmm.... nationalism and a one party state. Now where have I heard that one before...

[Wrath of Dagon]

@Ben You never fail to amuse and dismay.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[Elerond]

  

 

 

Isn't that bit old news, because now its been at least for 11 years that order to get passport one needs to give clear picture of your face and fingerprints to government who will share them with other governments.

Interesting. I don't remember providing my fingerprints for my passport, but its been a while so maybe I did?

 

 

It seems that USA only demands such thing from foreign passports and even though US Passports also now have biometric chip where such data could be saved and read from distance it isn't used.

 

Clearly we need to take visa free travelling from people travelling with US Passports as they clearly have insecure passports 

 

I don't think we demand anything from foreign passports except that they identify the person and not be fake.

 

 

As for foreigners travelling to the U.S., if they wish to enter U.S. visa-free under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), they are now required to possess machine-readable passports that comply with international standards. Additionally, for travellers holding a valid passport issued on or after 26 October 2006, such a passport must be a biometric passport if used to enter the U.S. visa-free under the VWP.

 

Finland and other EU countries adopted biometric passport because USA required it for visa free travelling, I thought that it was two way street where US passports have same information, but it seems that they don't.

[HoonDing]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/06/steve-bannon-calls-jared-kushner-a-cuck-and-globalist-behind-his-back.html

 

He may look like a toad, but still tells it like it is.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Trump needs to remember who brought him to the dance. Ivanka especially is way too liberal.

[Ben No.3]

@Ben You never fail to amuse and dismay.

I hope I dismay you, it's a sign I'm saying the right things.

[Guard Dog]

 

You know I would not be opposed to a universal income under a certain condition. Suppose the US decided they are going to pay every American over the age of 18 the equivalent of a full time worker at minimum wage. That would be around $15k per year, $1200 a month give or take. And the US agreed to provide single payer health coverage on all single expenses over say $15k. In other words, need a kidney transplant we'll cover you. Needs stitches? Get out your credit card. And that is it. That is the only two benefits you get from Uncle Sam. No social security, no government guaranteed loans, no food stamps, nothing. What you earn over that you'll be taxed on at the usual rate.

 

Would that be acceptable? Do you guys realize that would be less than we are paying per citizen for all the boondoggles mess we have now? Reason Magazine did a piece on that last year. I'll see if I can find it

It appears this forum can come up with some sort of common ground. I have an idea... we all together try outline how "our" state would look like. The thread would be a bloody mess, but I'd be interested to see water we can come up with something

 

Well, you lost me altogether when you mentioned nationalizing big businesses and banks. You do realize a business or a bank belongs to someone right? Often many someones. By nationalizing it you are taking it away from whomever owns it at gunpoint. It would be no different if armed police kicked in your door and said "this is our house now. Get out". If you nationalized GM for example what do you think would happen to all the folks whose retirement funds were heavily invested in GM? Citizens of a free country should not live in fear the government will take their property away from them.

 

Which of course brings up other topics like Civil Asset Forfeiture, Imminent Domain, etc. You all know how I feel about that already.

[Meshugger]

 

Yes. Unconditional means unconditional

Kooky.

 

They are testing it in Finnland right now.

Huh, does everyone just quit their jobs then? I know I would!

 

As a side effect, I bet their population will start BOOMING once they realize they can just pump out dependents for free l00t.

 

 

So far it hasn't produced any meaningful results compared to regular social services. But it's still early.

 

I support it in principle, but it has to be adjusted annually like a negative income tax compared to the median income in order to avoid the same problem as the cycle of welfare causes.

[Elerond]

 

Yes. Unconditional means unconditional

Kooky.

 

They are testing it in Finnland right now.

Huh, does everyone just quit their jobs then? I know I would!

 

As a side effect, I bet their population will start BOOMING once they realize they can just pump out dependents for free l00t.

 

 

Our current unemployment benefits are bigger that proposed basic income, so for unemployed people it just means less income, but for people in with jobs it increases income, especially for those who do temp jobs.