Ending Welfare as We Know It

[hayesc0]

Money is never the issue.

Money is definelty an issue maybe not the only issue but definitely an issue.

 

[Cynic]

Money is definelty an issue maybe not the only issue but definitely an issue.

if you say so :hitunes:

 

[Poh SIti Dawn]

off topic but it irk my nerves
when i see welfare/section 8 hood rat recipients
driving in beamers and eating
when my tax dollars are the reason
why these hoes are "living hood"

There just material objects. They Dont have much value in the real world ffs

 

[iFightSeagullsForBread]

off topic but it irk my nerves
when i see welfare/section 8 hood rat recipients
driving in beamers and eating
when my tax dollars are the reason
why these hoes are "living hood"

nikka....you do realize people tend to sell link cards right?

 

[Serious]

Homogenous populations

It'll never happen here, only in countries that have extremely low minority populations.

 

[Serious]

This will be a complete disaster

Healthcare
Rent
Living expenses

Pick one

OR, blow it all on bullshyt and interest from payday loans, because you have never had money and by extension don't know how to manage it

No offense to your trolling but how would gni be an incentive for drugs addicts.....

 

[Serious]

someone posted a article not son long ago, i think it might have been @theworldismine13 about why this wouldnt work here in the U.S and why it does work so well in those smaller countries

idk if its cause am a social worker or what but i just dont see this working out , i deal with people on a day to day basis in "the system" and giving them a extra $10k to $20k a year imo wouldnt help them out of there situation

who knows might help a small minority

Would you agree that too a certain extinct, poverty is a state of mind.

 

[JahFocus CS]

The Wrong Kind of UBI | Jacobin

This is a good exploration of this from the Left, and the article also criticizes the use of the UBI to eviscerate social programs.

All of this, however, rests on one condition: that the level of basic income is high enough to eliminate the need to work for a wage. Otherwise, people would still be forced to labor under a boss, and most of the features that make it potentially emancipatory would disappear. A parsimonious basic income could even depress wages since workers would require less pay to subsist.

Considering the fundamentally different political implications, a basic income above and below the level of a livable income should be treated as different proposals. We could call them a livable basic income (LBI) and a non-livable basic income (NLBI).

Could an NLBI still be a significant improvement over the status quo, even if it is not as transformative as an LBI? It entirely depends on the source of its funding and other associated measures.

If the money for an NLBI comes from taxing the 1 percent or cutting prison or military expenditures, it is clearly positive. For example, Matt Bruenig and Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig call for a $3,000-a-year basic income that would be financed by raising taxes on the rich and reducing the “submerged welfare state for the affluent” — a robust redistributive measure even if it doesn’t lead to a radical post-work transformation of society.

But it should not escape our attention that an NLBI is very similar to the negative income tax (NIT) favored by libertarian economists, including Milton Friedman. An NIT simply means that those who make less than a certain income threshold receive money back from the government instead of paying any income taxes. Friedman argued that after instating an NIT, you could eliminate all other existing welfare programs, reducing bureaucracy and market interference.

More recently, the libertarian political scientist Charles Murray has proposed an annual unconditional grant of $10,000 for every adult and scrapping the rest of the welfare state, including Social Security and Medicare.

Even if a basic income is not introduced as a libertarian scheme, financing it by eviscerating other social policy or public investment programs (or through non-progressive taxes) would likely have a negative redistributive effect, without increasing the scope of freedom.

In a political context in which the Left is on the defensive, such an outcome is not unlikely. The Swiss proposal advocates for a considerably higher and livable 2,500 francs per month — and its proposed text for the constitutional amendment states a basic income should “enable a dignified existence” for the entire population — but the vast majority of parliamentary members bitterly oppose the social movement–led plan. In Finland, it’s a center-right government that’s proposing the multiple options up for consideration, with different levels of income and funding sources, containing both progressive and reactionary possibilities.

Even if the Left had sufficient political power to win a progressive NLBI, it is far from clear it should be our primary demand. We still need better-funded and free higher education, massive investment in green infrastructures and energy sources, and the restoration and expansion of decimated social policy programs, just to name a few priorities.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

No offense to your trolling but how would gni be an incentive for drugs addicts.....

Its no trolling.

You give a drug addict a SNAP card, they gotta find somebody to trade food for cash. You give them straight cash instead, what do you think is gonna happen?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

The Wrong Kind of UBI | Jacobin

This is a good exploration of this from the Left, and the article also criticizes the use of the UBI to eviscerate social programs.

This too. It's not just about the money. In fact, I wish social programs did more than just income transfers. As decades of welfare programs show simple income transfers don't empower the poor. We need a different approach. Income transfers can be part of the solution, but not the whole or primary solution.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

The Wrong Kind of UBI | Jacobin

This is a good exploration of this from the Left, and the article also criticizes the use of the UBI to eviscerate social programs.

This too. It's not just about the money. In fact, I wish social programs did more than just income transfers. As decades of welfare programs show simple income transfers don't empower the poor. We need a different approach. Income transfers can be part of the solution, but not the whole or primary solution.

 

[hayesc0]

Homogenous populations

 

[Trajan]

It'll never happen here, only in countries that have extremely low minority populations.

someone posted a article not son long ago, i think it might have been @theworldismine13 about why this wouldnt work here in the U.S and why it does work so well in those smaller countries

idk if its cause am a social worker or what but i just dont see this working out , i deal with people on a day to day basis in "the system" and giving them a extra $10k to $20k a year imo wouldnt help them out of there situation

who knows might help a small minority

Homogenous populations

Do you think America would have been more ''socialist'' if the population was 90%+ white?

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/do-y...ialist-if-the-population-was-90-white.422165/

 

[hayesc0]

Do you think America would have been more ''socialist'' if the population was 90%+ white?

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/do-y...ialist-if-the-population-was-90-white.422165/

Yes.

 

[Serious]

Do you think America would have been more ''socialist'' if the population was 90%+ white?

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/do-y...ialist-if-the-population-was-90-white.422165/

Actually I do