Basic Income - Page 3

Read your first sentence. Only.
To be clear, no, I do not 'carry a gun'. What youre referring to was when I lived in a small town in sc that had high crime, over thirty years ago. The gun was in my glove compartment, a legal place to carry, cop was fine with it. By the the way, the chief in that county highly recommends women do 'carry'...not because of poverty but because of gangs and scummy people who enjoy preying on others.
Further, if I chose to 'carry', that's my business, not yours.

I certainly can't take this idea seriously, there is just so much wrong with it. In order to make it work, all high earners are essentially being told they will be supporting all the low earners. What does that mean? Fifty cents on every dollar they earn will be "redistributed"?

If you do away with all the social programs and instead throw money at people, how does that make those problems go away, especially if the recipients abuse their stipend? Addictions won't disappear, nor any of their underlying related health issues. Are we supposed to say, you blew your wad, now wait two weeks and hope you live long enough to cash the next check? That is a solution? Just to not care?

The poverty statistics being quoted and lamented with the problem of poor people needing to be steadily fed, ignore that food stamps and other such non cash benefits are not being counted to arrive at the poverty threshold. That observation goes for both web sites being used to illustrate the facts.

Is it fair that a housewife who is disabled needs to depend on her husband for social benefits? Best to stay married, then! (Or, divorce and not remarry, that works, too, after ten years of matrimony, I think!) The study suggested that divorces increased! Or did it? Nothing is conclusive with this entire idea as presented in the article. Isn't access to spousal benefits the basis of the LBGT community in demanding same sex marriage rights? That the non-working spouse is eligible to be covered by the working spouse? My own mother disabused me of the notion that the world was a fair place before I was six years old. Fairness is a moral notion worthy of striving for, but not a guarantee because of the circumstance from having been born.

It only becomes my business when you tell me. So, learn to keep your mouth shut and then it won't be my business, simple. No matter what you guys think, I think this might just work and in the long be better for society. It will be tested over the next few decades so we will have to wait the results.

Really! Decades? And who do we trust with this? lol, I won't be holding my breath.

The Swiss look to be the first. Right cause it so much better to trust those billionaires because the money will trickle down, just wait for it. In the meantime we have children who are hungry and not being educated. We have so much time to wait.

Keep my mouth shut?
So, you bring GUNS into every topic here, no matter what, and accuse me of Carrying a gun, that  I'm supposedly scared because we don't have a complete communist welfare global economy causing criminal scum to proliferate. And you actually believe redistributing money from those who work! so therefore have, to those who, (for whatever reason) don't have, is going to eliminate criminal activity....
And it's not your business if I carry or not, you brought it up, so follow your own advice. You made an inacurate statement about me which I rebuked, and all you can do is blame me for your inaccurate comment and tell me to keep my mouth shut...no wonder you advocate global communism.

Global communism will be squashed by non steeple.

@GSD Are we reading the same article?

 

The entirety of the Swiss government opposes the referendum, citing potential effects on people’s willingness to work and the huge fiscal costs as reasons to vote “no.” Even Straub and his fellow supporters don’t expect it to pass. But he’s excited by the enthusiasm, and media attention, he’s seen for the idea in the past few years. Just getting on the ballot “was a moment of hope, for me and for a lot of other people,” he said. “It was a moment of departure.”

You crack me up with those elusive, nameless, evil "billionaires"!  Some billionaires are extraordinary and generous philanthophers, while others are greedy bastards. What really happens is if the economy is booming, and investments are making money, then the governments clean up in capital gains taxes. When that happens, as it does in cycles, everybody thinks money grows on trees! And then when the economy corrects, or busts up, from abuse and poor lending judgments for example, the governments lose that bonus of revenue, and have to offset those losses. Yes, the reality that money doesn't grow on trees is a tough one to come to grips with at those times. Then, it is true, that the larger fund distributing non-profits, like United Way are forced to make devastating cuts, as the availble slices of the money pie are being winnowed.

 

If a parent isn't providing or seeking the programs that are available for their hungry child, and if they aren't involved in their own child's education opportunities, then that is shame. More true is if they don't even think of the life they are capable of providing before they even have children. That has always been a wonder to me. Unless more kids just equals another government check!

However, saying these types of programs for food and other learning opportunities don't exist however, is just not accurate. I am not saying all is equal or ideal, only that a determined parent can make a difference in their child's day to day life, and there are choices in education, too. Sounds like your faith is in the government to be the best judge, and that may be true for some who aren't educated themselves, but I'd much rather trust in myself for making those type of best decisions for my own kids. Why would someone with less financial stability than myself want to give that authority up, as well? Makes no sense to me.  I will always be the best judge as to what is best for my kids, not the govt.

 

And how a decades long study, even if it were happening— is going to help feed and educate the impoverished child in your example, that is not apparent to me, at all. 

Are you sure you don't just like this idea because of this little gem:

 

...He (Standing) calls it “essential,” given that more and more people in developed economies are living “a life of chronic economic insecurity.” He sees this insecurity fueling populist politicians, boosting far-right parties across Europe and the rise of Donald Trump in the U.S. Economic stagnation increases the appeal of extreme politicians, and unless those insecurities are addressed, Standing said, that appeal is only going to get stronger.

Fear of the rise of the "far-right parties" infesting the world over?

 Sometimes, it seems, “populism” is just a synonym for widespread unhappiness with the status quo.

 

You might want to look up the word communism because your twisted thoughts on it are way off base. Here I saved you some time - a way of organizing a society in which the government owns the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) and there is no privately owned property - this is communism and since the global economy is nothing like the definition of communism only proves you talk a lot of BS and know even less of what you speak.

 

You told me to mind my own business well if you hadn't told this forum that you did in fact carry then I would have no clue about it so you want people to stay out of your business then quit talking about your business on a forum. When you put it out to the public people will talk about and they may not know or get the facts straight, tis life get over it. Pick up your toys and go run off for a few days, that always makes it so much better.