You have exactly 10 seconds to explain why Universal Basic Income

>>1676048

>paying morons who can't live on their own to live on their own.

It's like keeping poor people as pets but shittier.

Is this the newest meme the jews are pushing on the millennials?

This is simply the final nail in the coffin for that pesky middle class

First it was unemployment then welfare and a couple more social programs and now LITERAL free money

My grandpa was right. Give em an inch amd they take a mile. How can anyome say slippery slope isn't an argument now

universal basic income is meant to cover expenses like rent and food

but we all know people will actually use it for iPhones, designer clothes, and other stupid bullshit. Universal income will not destroy debt, and it will not destroy poverty, rather it will enable it further.

What % of the poverty line would you suggest a Basic income meet?

Also why universal? Why couldn't it be means tested?

The rich would rather have poors die in the streets or shoot them dead if they rise up.

Sorry poors, get rich or die tryin

>>1676053
One of the major things about UBI being a good idea is that each extra hoop you get the destitute to jump through, there is less money available to them.

So UBI is basically a way to get rid of all the dumb hoops to jump through and just give people money who need it, ultimately making government programs more efficient.

Please try to learn about the issues instead of repeating what other people think

File: 1475633280661.jpg (22KB, 438x372px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 438x372px

>>1676048
i just wrote out a reply to this and my browser shit itself

anyway the finnish government calculated the cost for UBI and it would succeed the value of the budget

>49 billion for 16/17 budget
>UBI would cost ~53 billion per year

its time these retards stopped pushing this shit. every time, its always the cunts in cities that advocate for it, expecting the government to pay for their overpriced rent and food

>>1676081
You're literally retarded and delusional if you think UBI will replace all social programs rather than simply be another one on the list

Like you don't actually know how government works if you think they'll get rid of Tyrone's Gibbs for UBI

>>1676084
Assuming that all that money goes into a gigantic pit or burned, yes it is a bad idea.

But it doesn't, poor people typically spend their money. So a lot of that will come back to the government via taxes. Better than bailing out the rich companies out there. It's basic economics anon.

>>1676088
>It'll just come back to the government

Broken window fallacy. This is basic economics

>>1676088
at that cost the government would have to literally privatise everything in order to pay for UBI

nothing wrong with running a small deficit every year but with all government expenses + UBI on top of that? yeah nah

>It's basic economics

wew

>>1676048
>let's pay people to not work
>work doesn't get done
>nobody pays taxes
>oh no

>>1676093
Yes obtaining that amount of money would be extremely difficult and that is a problem. Maybe you can start out small? It doesn't have to be a big shock and pretending that UBI is impossible because you absolutely need all this money up front is silly.

>>1676098
Who pays you to shill for UBI on this forum? Kill your self

>>1676100
u mad bitch

>>1676101
Kys shill

>>1676048
a universal income means the people at the top of the economic foodchain will suddenly not have the ablity to influence markets for personal gain via inflation etc

the people with the power to do this never will, because it fucks up what theyve built after all these decades

>>1676098
well when people first started discussing UBI i assumed they were referring to giving the unemployed a living wage, and to give the underemployed enough money per week / fortnight to bring them above the poverty line

the Finnish government want to give everyone in the entire country the same amount, regardless of how much they earn, which is absolutely retarded. UBI would be paid out in weekly or fortnightly instalments, its not like people would receive their yearly allowance all at once, which would prevent excessive spending if citizens we able to get full time jobs, leave the country, ect (if the system functions like i described above).

in order for the government to pay for something like this they would have to nationalise a considerable amount of the countries industry and raise taxes across the board

>>1676097
If UBI was in place, would there be a need for a minimum wage? Food for thought.

Jobs give people something to do every day, it's not always about money. If you had ever held a job you'd understand.

>>1676107
most of the countries (nordic) that they keep talking about implementing UBI in dont actually have a mandated minimum wage, they have a strong union presence instead which succeeds in negotiating what would be considered a "reasonable" wage

>>1676106
It would be tougher for eurozone countries because they can't print their own money. And the people who didn't need UBI would probably be paying back what they get and more anyways.

At the end of the day UBI is going to need be paid for by the ultra rich, problem is no one has figured out a way to tax them fairly without dragging everyone else down.

>>1676051
I'd list every flaw with Capitalism, but it'd be too long.

File: Hammer_and_sickle.png (2KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 400x400px

>>1676048

File: 1468757208967.gif (2MB, 293x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 293x240px

>>1676119

>>1676048
>no really guys it's not communism

Inflation will destroy any UBI scheme.

Also, personally I find it morally wrong, because some of the money will be used to buy drugs. So, we have my tax money directly subsidizing the cartels.

Why would anyone in power agree to give the poor people a stable income in which they gain nothing from them?

The closes thing i can see to UBI is maybe McBucks or Walmart $$, where you're only eligible to spend it at participating retailers.

Why do you think Obamacare is a thing and not UBH?

>>1676700
not if you made all drugs legal

>>1676729
politics, the reason basic income for everyone wouldn't work is that people want more.
look at the poverty line. you will be poor even if you made double that.
being house poor is a thing. people buy stupid shit to keep up aperiences I know people who fall in debt and buy shit at target instead of the little Mexican grocer on the bad part of town. you can buy the exact same shit for 75% less money. the quality may vary a little but wtf. I gess being poor makes you stupid.

>>1676816
This is the kind of thing that happens when being poor is shameful as a society. People will do anything to avoid being labelled poor.

As much as /pol/ wants to believe that poors are lazy and worthless, people are ultimately a product of their environment. If you keep withholding resources from them, lock them into the ghettos and constantly shame them for existing, they are just going to get stuck in a perpetual cycle for generations.

And at the end of the day, taxpayers are responsible for what happens to society. You can either pay up and keep everyone happy and productive or you can continue to have entire pockets of cities (and the countryside for that matter) be no-go Day-Z hellscapes.

>>1676700
>implying UBI wouldn't be fixed to the average rate of inflation and even then still be adjusted yearly

Stop being daft, newfag.

>>1676048
I'm afraid, 10 sec is not enou...

>>1676732
Some of this money will fund terrorism and people trafficking too. What next, Einstein, legalise those too?

>>1676700
>So, we have my tax money directly subsidizing the cartels

it already does

>>1676107
> the "everybody wants to work!" meme
People want to retire or do something cool like paint or camp or shoot guns or do competitive speedboat racing. There aren't enough people that want to actually do the boring jobs that need to be done.

>>1676088

For fuck's sake

The reason it won't work is because the people having to fund this (working people) will think "fucking hang on, this is dumb, why am I paying for other people to lounge about, while I slave at work every day trying to climb the corporate ladder"

Then again I guess you could make the same argument about benefits

I guess this idea is literally just benefits, but bigger. Bigger benefits.

People don't love benefits as it is so I don't think they'll love this idea. We've got stricter on benefits in this country (the UK) in the last few years so hopefully we'll get even stricter still. Loungers should be shot 2bh.

The reason why it will never work is tha

>>1676048

Look you commie faggots, you shit has failed again and again and again and this repacking will fail as well.

Take your gulag loving asses wad up a photo of stalin and choke to death

>>1676048
Practically: it will just devalue money. Goods and services (rent, utilities) will just get hiked in price as everyone can now afford it - and anybody who doesn't qualify for neetbux is now correspondingly poorer.

Morally: why the fuck is anybody entitled to what they didn't earn?

>>1676894
Then the boring jobs will pay more, become less boring, or get automated. Not like the free market is going away.

>UBI is going to pay for my speedboat and all my guns
Seriously dude? The key word we are looking for here is universal BASIC income.

Every leisure activity you mentioned there costs money. UBI wouldn't be enough to pay for this. Let's not pretend UBI is like winning the lottery and you are set for life, it would just be enough to pay for the basic necessities. You'd still need a job to pay for leisure.

Side note, if you are remotely successful in your hobby and you can figure out how to get people to pay you to do it, even in small sums it would help to diversify our society and perhaps create new industries. Think lower-tier athletics and e-sports, artists, cooks or any other very underpaid sector. It would also make entrepreneurship or running a small business more accessible because people wil know you can lose it all knowing you have a safety net.

>>1676914
The wonderful life of living in someone's basement apartment eating instant noodles. Damn I wish I could be that successful.

>>1676051
>>1676053
>>1676063
>>1676074
>>1676075
>>1676086
>>1676097
>>1676106
>>1676914
>>1676955
You fucking imbeciles, the whole point of UBI is that EVERYONE gets it, regardless of income. But hey this is /biz/ so why would I think anyone would be familiar with anything relating to economics?

>>1676841
If the min wage is not fixed to inflation, then ubi won't have a hope of that. Keep dreaming.

>>1676048
>You have exactly 10 seconds to explain why Universal Basic Income isn't the future

Because it's against human nature. A UBI would fail in the same ways that communism has failed throughout history.

Housing, healthcare and education will go up until the universal will only afford you them.

>>1676816
i would assume that if ever reaching UBI, we'd have everything else in a row as well. healthcare, education, social and foreign policy and etc.

i would think by then we'd have a more informed poor class and better ways to benefit.

Our money would become so worthless, they would just be giving out free toilet paper.

You can't give somebody something without first taking it from somebody else.

>>1676048
I feed my cats guaranteed and they catch less mice.

File: hqdefault.jpg (19KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 480x360px

We already have a pilot program for UBI. It's called our private prison system.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

>>1676975
So you're saying they'll be motivated to work because they'll find the basement life so shitty that they'll aspire to something else?

Have you ever visited 4chan?

>>1676998
>You fucking imbeciles, the whole point of UBI is that EVERYONE gets it, regardless of income.
Okay. But all that means is that working people will have to pay a massive chunk out of their salary, only for some of it to come back to them, right?

It will have to be a massive chunk, otherwise the economics of paying EVERYBODY won't stack up.

But hey this is /biz/ so why would I think anyone would be familiar with anything relating to economics? ;)

>>1677076
Well, most people on 4chan want to do something productive with their lives but have landed in shitty situations or have fucked up in the past and are not content with their current situation. Or else they wouldn't be trying to escape their identity by posting on the most fucked up reject web forum in the planet. How new are you?

Not to mention that the plural of anecdote is not data.

>>1676048
>1 post by this ID

>>1677101
>fucked up situation
>>Has the ability and time to post on %chan, from a first world country

Huh really makes you think

>>1677118
>you live in a first world country, therefore you can't possibly be a fuck up

I mean it's easy to spout propaganda and all but have you ever had to think for yourself at any point in your life?

Universal basic income is NOT a "luxury".
Universal basic income is NOT a "socialist utopia".

UBI is an alternative to the poverty traps, that is the welfare and financial aid from the government.

Many such aids have criteria such as not working a job more than x hours, or not making more than y dollars. People get afraid of losing their benefits permanently, e.g. while still in a part-time or unstable work environment, or, it can simply become a matter of time vs reward. People don't want to work more if it means getting less benefits.

For example: if the scenario is a) either work for 10 hours one day for $50, or b) work 0 hours for $25, that puts your de facto hourly wage at just $2,5. That makes most people choose b). In the most extreme cases, they'll even lose money if choosing to work.

It's a function to get people to work as much as they can, without fear of the loss in benefits.

>>1677101
But they would magically get over their personal problems if you gave them MORE money to sit at home and shitpost? Please tell me what mental disabilities you have? I think they are severe.

I've been on 4chan since around 2007, cunt.

>Not to mention that the plural of anecdote is not data.
Christ you are a fucking pretentious twat.

>>1677118
This. Really don't see how throwing more money at them is going to give them any more incentive to get off their asses.

>>1677129
>BUT THROWING MONEY AT LAYABOUTS IS *DEFINITELY* GOING TO MEAN THEY OVERCOME THEIR LACK OF CONFIDENCE / LACK OF SALEABLE SKILLS / SHITTY FAMILY SITUATION!

>IT DEFINITELY ISN'T GOING TO MEAN THEY SPEND IT ON DRUGS AND BOOZE AND PARTYING AND INTERNET GAMES!

You fucking moron.

>>1676971
Yeah, just like how food stamps and child support money could mathematically never be spent on McDonalds, iPhones and lottery tickets... oh, wait.

The kind of dumb mother fucker most likely to qualify for your magical poverty-destroying panacea is also the exact same demographic who is provably most likely to abuse it.

>>1676998
Fine, so you can disregard the one sentence in my post relating to the have-nots being relatively worse off. Now address the issue of currency devaluation.

>>1677171
Not an argument

>>1677182
Statistically welfare cheats and abusers are a minority.

Because if you give $X to everyone, the cost of living will rise by $X.

>>1677185
Well if you are taking all of the funding through taxes you aren't printing additional money so the currency doesn't get devalued.

>>1677205
But welfare dependency isn't

>>1677218
If are taxing less people than you are giving money to then how would you be able to give out enough money to supply everyone with a base livable wadge ? you cant just take the money from taxes and give back more than you take, where would the money come from? you would need to increase the amount of money in circulation decreasing the value, or tax people way too much which would defeat the purpose of giving them the money in the first place.

>>1676048
cause its shit and a fad

>>1677290
Because you are better off staying on welfare once you get it because of the hoops you have to jump through to get it, which UBI would fix.

>>1677218
take 318.9 m people and give each one 1000 dollars per month to live on. Now assuming they spend every penny of that every month at the end of the year it would cost the government more then they make in collecting taxes each year, not even including the additional expenses that the government is responsible for. you would need to print more money to maintain thus devaluing the money.

>>1676048
because basic income is nothing more than communism which has been tried and failed. it will do nothing but create shortages and price increases.

if you weren't a brain dead commie faggot you'd realize that. a better question is why we don't turn worthless wastes like you into fertilizer?

>>1677305
I know it can be difficult to understand economics but please try to remember that things you buy have to be supplied from somewhere and typically the supplier, the rest of the supply chain, the income of the workers and the owners get from their activities get taxed. There's probably more that I'm missing.

The additional demand would result in more jobs too and serve as a stimulating factor to the economy.

>>1677308
>any sort of government action in the market is brutal communism
Strange how such a gross lie can enrage a man to the point where he wants to kill his own brothers.

Please continue to cry so I can drink your tears while I exercise my first amendment rights.

File: u05_04271293.jpg (640KB, 1247x818px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 1247x818px

>>1677320
>commie faggot that wants to starve his own people has the nerve to call anyone his brother
i hope to live to see the day when you leftists parasites take your rightful place hanging from light posts.

>>1677324
Yes! More! Let the hate consume you.

>>1676088
>UBI gets instituted
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize UBI
>prices go up to subsidize increased corporate taxes
>UBI goes up to subsidize increased prices
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize increasing UBI
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize UBI
>prices go up to subsidize increased corporate taxes
>UBI goes up to subsidize increased prices
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize increasing UBI
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize UBI
>prices go up to subsidize increased corporate taxes
>UBI goes up to subsidize increased prices
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize increasing UBI
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize UBI
>prices go up to subsidize increased corporate taxes
>UBI goes up to subsidize increased prices
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize increasing UBI
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize UBI
>prices go up to subsidize increased corporate taxes
>UBI goes up to subsidize increased prices
>corporate taxes go up to subsidize increasing UBI
>corporate taxes go up to...

>>1677324
We're kind of going in the opposite direction, stores are full but people have no money to buy.

screw basic income.. freemarkets should decide the fate of personal income. Abolish minimum wage and gibbedats.

Lolbertarians is the future

>>1677571
>abolish minimum wage
>all employers drop wages to 25c/day
Great plan

>>1677614
>give everyone a bunch of free money
>expect prices to stay the same on everything
Great plan

>>1676053
I think I love you. Idc if you're a man.

>>1676081
>>1676998
So a doctor earns as much as a burger flipper? I'm pretty familiar with how this economy shit works. No, I'm not a cupcake. Are you from Russia?

>>1677616
Oh burn

>>1677205
Yeah, they're mostly minorities, but pointing that out is "racist".

>>1677210
You'd be amazed how many people on a finance forum are unable to grasp this.

>>1677315
The *global* economy maybe, when we're discussing acountry that imports most of its goods. The wealth created by UBI will be gratefully received by millions of Chinamen. I bet you're anti-Trump too, right?

File: Bolton-newton.jpg (331KB, 1000x1338px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1000x1338px

>>1676902
what a dire view of humanity.
some of the greatest advances in humanity were came from rich bum trustfund kids who did the cutting edge work because they had the time and enjoyed it.

>>1677571
>>1677614
>the /biz/ brain trust
if you want to abolish the minimum wage the first step is introducing basic income.

ITT: A lot of people who think they are "productive". And can "earn" their keep.

You are not. You are slow, weak, stupid and expensive. We just haven't gotten around to automating you yet. We were busy working on the stock traders, managers, programmers, doctors and lawyers: the expensive people.

If you drive a car, operate machinery, work as clerk, analyze financial data, read or generate reports of any kind, create websites, write news articles, or manage people who do any of these things (etc. etc.), your "career" will not last longer than a couple decades.

If you plan on having a job for longer than that, you need a new plan. UBI is one, an hero is another, but the idea that things can go on as they have, or even go back to how they were, is laughable.

File: makeitrain.webm (567KB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

567KB, 720x404px

>>1678069
>tfw the better society fairs the better my industry fairs
UBI em all.

>>1676048
Ultra expensive but gov gets nothing in return.

Far better to have a universal right to a government job.

>>1678069
You need a little more zip on this to really sell it.
Something like "All will cower before me and obey my brutal commands! The horizon of eternal bloodshed approaches!"
You know, kinda Conan-esque.

>>1676048
It exists, it's called women in the workplace.

The point is moot. They're trying it in canada soon so we'll see how this works.

My bet is that UBI is better than general welfare systems, but that's like not being in last place at the special Olympics.

Hitler's universal employment was a much better idea.

>>1678309
Universal employment was not a concept created to compete against automation.
While you could argue that america would benefit immensely from autobahn like projects, roads last much longer than their construction period.

>>1676048
>Everybody suddenly has more money
>Prices increase

Mansa Musa single-handedly crashed the economies of Saharan Africa on his way to Mecca by handing out gold to anyone and everyone, especially the poor. It devalued gold coinage and prices inflated, so nobody could afford anything.

In a UBI system, everybody having more money would inflate prices and we'd be right back at square one, nobody would be able to afford shit.

>>1678359
>Comparing Saharan levels of scarcity with American economy
Maybe next time Trevor.

>>1678359
its the same argument as

>workers wages rise
>prices of goods increase

no its not. a for profit company can pay you as much as they want and it has nothing to do with the prices of goods and services. whats the difference between a rich man spending money and a poor one. its the same shit.

>>1678376
This is not about a single company, a single rich man, or a single poor man. This is about literally every single person in the economy being handed money. All of it devalues. The market can bear higher prices, so prices will rise. And if the money supply remains the same such that it's just a redistribution from the rich to everyone, then the economy stagnates to boot. But the money supply is always increasing, so we get it all. Double inflation plus stagnation. People's UBI will be worthless once it reaches their checking accounts.

>>1678381
Exactly. With UBI, the main source of inflation BY FAR will be UBI itself. So the gov't will have to spend more to counteract the inflation, which will just make it worse.

It's like bidding against yourself at an auction.

>>1678373
>the point
>
>.
>
>
>
>
>
>.
>
>
>your head

wouldn't it just obliterate the currency with inflation?

>>1676048
Where does the money come from?

And don't say "lel guvmint can just print money". Everytime you print more currency it becomes a bit more worthless.

>>1676107
>it's not always about money

It literally is though. Take away everyones wages and tell them they can stay home and make the same amount of money and who do you think would turn up to work?

Everyone just got $500 per week free from the government?

Great - time to increase the rent I charge my tenants by at least $1000-2000/month - I know they are good for it

The concept behind universal basic income works, in as much as many companies are publicly held and generate dividends that are distributed to shareholders. It's not really any different from having a trust that manages assets and distributes gains to beneficiaries. The difference is that the trust is run by the government and the beneficiaries are the citizens.

The idea functions basically in that if UBI doesn't cover the cost of living, everyone still has to work their shitty jobs. If it covers the cost of living, there is still incentive to work to cover luxuries. If it pays so flipping much that you can buy all the Doritos and mt dew and vidya you want, the economy is pretty strong, we live in post scarcity, and people can spend their time doing what they want to do, probably as part of some organization that produced content.

The pitfall of the whole thing is it all depends on how competent the government is at running trusts and NOT fucking the free market over via legislation that favors companies that have a large government interest.

Or at least that's how I see it functioning. In reality, I don't think the concept goes much behind "gibs money".

>>1679195
But that isn't what UBI is about at all, Anon

Why are there so many inflation hawks in this thread when we are struggling to stay away from deflation right now?

Interest rates are NEGATIVE in some parts of the world, how on earth could you be worried about inflation? Put your economics 101 textbooks away kids, we're talking about the real world here.

>>1678061
How about the American companies that import and sell those Chinese goods to you? Do you understand what a service-based economy is?

>>1676048
>Socialism

It never works anon, never.

File: bellcurve.jpg (40KB, 329x499px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 329x499px

>>1678063

Thats because smart people get rich, fuck, then give birth to smart kids through the process of genetics. Dequan, 7th child of Sh'letrenel Marquishus, wont be advancing society in his free time.

You could even read a book about this, but it might offend your ideology.

>>1680203
you know... except in Scandinavia currently where its working very well.

>>1678063
>were came from
Opinion disregarded
>>1680230
Genetics is not a straight line like that. Smart parents can have literally fucking retarded kids. Its very complex.

File: migrants-paris-727862.jpg (69KB, 590x350px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 590x350px

>>1680235

It will work a few more years, even decades, in Denmark where they have essentially closed borders to the 3rd world. Sweden has already started cutting back on social welfare and will have to abandon the Nordic model once their minority portion of the population grows in excess proportion to their tax paying population (which is rapidly decreasing).

The only nordic country that really has any chance at sustaining their welfare state in the medium term is Norway, a country sitting on a 1 trillion dollar oil-funded sovereign wealth fund. Even then, all you have to do is look at the degenerating population of Saudi Arabia to see that such polices make people weak, corrupt and wasteful.

>>1680203
socialism is an economical model, basic income is not.

even friedman argued for it. google negative income tax

File: 1472999850462.jpg (424KB, 1675x1137px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1675x1137px

>>1680238

There is genetic drift sure, but averaged out, my statement holds true. Two parents of 100 IQ have a far, far greater chance of giving birth to a child with 101 IQ than a couple 70 IQ knuckle draggers. This is why there is endemic poverty in ghettos (which are genetic ghettos as well as economic). It's why famous people from ghettos are mostly fighters or sportsballers. It's why an absurd percentage of rappers are actually well educated and upper class, just with a veneer of street cred.

UBI and all forms of socialism subsidizes the irresponsible and incapable to have kids at the expense of those that are responsible and capable. It's all super fucked up from an evolutionary biology perspective.

>>1676048
i like universal basic income for an ideal society it would work out stellar, but, currently we are not there yet. when the total produce is made 99% by robots and 70% of services is provided by robots, then we will have no other choice really.

>>1680271
>subsidizes the irresponsible and incapable to have kids at the expense of those that are responsible and capable
Sure, but there are far more of the former, which is why there will always be proponents of this kind of shit.

>>1680271
>Two parents of 100 IQ have a far, far greater chance of giving birth to a child with 101 IQ than a couple 70 IQ knuckle draggers.
except if you take that supposedly high IQ child and don't teach it to speak, it will have an IQ of a retard, even on nonverbal tests.

meaning IQ is a result of environment far more than heredity, and your silly understanding of things crumbles to dust.

i love to read low iq posts about high iq.
it's like financial advice from poorfags.

>>1676103
>decades

try centuries. TPTB have been since Rome

File: 1466906009586.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>1680280

There are a number of well know studies (Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study, The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, every identical twin study ever done, etc) that directly contradict what you are saying.

One of the most well funded school districts in America is baltimore, that gets over $17,000 per student per year. All that tax payer money isnt doing jack shit to make the students even remotely competitive.

>>1680297
It's impossible to recognize when someone is significantly smarter than you.

thus idiots think they're smarter than others while the actual intelligent constantly wonder.

>>1680303
>that directly contradict what you are saying.
I'd love to read a twin study where one wasn't taught to speak.

>>1680303
>One of the most well funded school districts in America is baltimore, that gets over $17,000 per student per year.
ah, you're assuming money alters the environment favorably.

while ignoring culture that punishes achievement.

you are a racist idiot. I apologize for speaking to you.

>>1676849
anarchy+UBI= Kino

File: 1474171793163.jpg (66KB, 800x688px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 800x688px

>>1680309

>acknowledges that money doesn't do anything to improve shit people from shit places

>still supports giagantic wastes of taxpayer money like UBI, welfare etc...

wew lads

>>1676084
>>UBI would cost ~53 billion per year
Is this net of the extra tax revenue that UBI would generate? Presumably if you give everyone some extra money, they're going to spend a lot of it on taxable transactions. And the businesses that receive the money will pay taxes on their profits. And they will use some of that money to pay their employees, which will be taxable income. And those employees will then spend the money, repeating the cycle.

pluses for UBI

+ ultrapoor spend money, fueling the economy
+ crime drops slightly due to alternative available to crime for profit
+ civil unrest also drops
+housing market improves slightly

minuses

-more government debt
-people who feel it is a free handout make a faction of crazy demonstrators
-political uprisings
-unknown effect on inflation/deflation

>>1680696
what a bunch of nonsense

pros:

people have not to fear that much to lose their jobs so they might bee more inclined to stand up for themselves and expect a fair treatment.

people incapable of productive work can still live with some dignity

cons:

it's inherently inflationary (or even hyper-inflationary if it's adjusted) because the ubi sets a new zero to the paychecks and peoples willingness to work more hours for more money is not linear at all. basically it would make it more expensive to actually employ productive people more money supply = inflation unless the people suddenly decide to save like crazy (which won't happen).

in the end wages and prices reach a level where your ubi is almost nonexistent and does not provide you a living. if you raise it it all starts again. working people demand more money for their time or are willing to work less for the same money. and prices go up and back to square one.

really when i think about it ubi should not be money.

ubi should be universal free housing (basically you get a flat in a commie block if you want better home then buy or rent it) universal free utilities (up to they typical consumption you know after that it's pay time, run your miners on your dosh!) and food stamps that allow you to feed yourself and free public transportation.

they should receive almost no fucking money just a little pocket money.

this could all be solved without much effort and in effect it's almost a reality, except they call it welfare and there is all kinds of bureaucratic shit around it instead of being as automatized as possible.

hell this could actually save money to the system i don't know.

Why is /leftypol/ raiding /biz/? Did you guys get tired of getting BTFO in /pol/?

>>1681133
But welfare is shit and doesn't work. Just like UBI its a retarded idea.
Why are you so intent on having a 80% income tax for a bunch of free loaders?

>>1681135
you don't seem to get your figures in the right magnitude. ubi wouldn't cost much more than welfare+pension+disabilities (which it would all replace) i have seen the calcs on this one (of course it's about my country so other places might have different figures) it's nowhere near impossible without raising taxes.

like i said the only problem with ubi is it causes inflation there is no escaping this fact it's human nature.

>>1681135
>But welfare is shit and doesn't work.
what? are you out of your mind? half my country is only alive because of welfare of one sort. and by being alive they are consumers and use services the economy would be much smaller without them.

we have shit high taxes for sure. my problem again is not with the magnitude more like how complicated the tax system, with a base flat rate of 18% or what you end up paying 60% of your earning to the state a hundred different ways. and the sad fact is the cost of that bureaucracy is basically the pay of the public workers who would also receive welfare if not for their pointless jobs. it would be cheaper i guess but more humiliating for them.

ubi would change this a lot. the psychology or earnings income and safety, we could be more honest about what makes the economy work and stuff.

>>1681139
in fact only 40% of the population works and creates value, the 60% is only consumer.

and we don't have 80% income tax despite not being a rich country at all. a country with good strong economy could easily support this level of welfare with much lower tax rates (which is officially like 40% total with everything but the employer is taxed too and there is vat !be forever damned whoever came up with it!)

so it is pretentious to assume that ubi would result in impossibly high taxes.

I do think it'll be the future. If only to prevent the big revolution once we reach 40%+ unemployment due to progressively automating everything. It may just be a measure to keep capitalism going and the masses subdued. I don't know if it's a long-term solution, but I'm sure it'll be deployed one day. If we can't provide enough work for most of the people anymore we have to get over the mindset that a human's value depends on the paid work they perform or there'll be blood in the streets sooner or later.

If you think about it, it's not that terrible for businesses. Right now you have a massive problem trying to sort enthusiastic workers from people who are just here to earn a living. Do a poll in any given company. I'll guarantee you that on average 50% or more are just here for the paycheck. They drag their heels and clock-out by the second. With UBI those wouldn't apply anymore and you'd be left with the work-horses who love their jobs and give everything for the company. And even better - you can pay them less because everyone gets UBI anyway and since most people will be unemployed even small additional income will be a massive status symbol.

If anything it'll *increase* the divide between the rich (business owners, high-tier employees) and the poor (UBI slackers). Why would the rich oppose this?

>>1677101
>Not to mention that the plural of anecdote is not data.
Except it literally is. That's the definition. Data is an aggregation of single data points aka anecdotes. Do you ever pause and think about what you're parroting? Your comment was easily the stupidest and most unscientific thing in this thread, which is saying quite a lot.

>>1677808

This is weak bait. But in case you're actually a retard, the basic income is separate from the amount of money you make, so if you make 20k a year and basic income gives you an extra 15k you get 35k, or if you make 100k you'd get 115k.

Because with a basic income everything will be made mor

>>1681504
Basic income is weak b8. With basic income nobody will be working unless they have to.
You have to be actually mentally challenged to think that communism will work, ever. If basic income becomes a thing it will destroy the economy. Hyper inflation will happen and you retards would start demanding basic income raise to 15 dollars an hour.
What is wrong with you people? Why do you think people deserve money for no other accomplishment then being fucking born?

>>1681145
What country do you live.
I bet its a shit hole that produces nothing of value to the world. the fact that you have a 40% unemployment rate is reason enough to know you are a shit hole
>le muh human beans will die without it
No they won't. Humans are no different from animals, this includes myself. You don't fucking feed the animals at the park. If you didn't live in a shitty welfare state more than 60% of your country would be creating value and the 1-3% that couldn't would simply live on the street, die or live with their mom.

>>1681139
The UBI is not a safety net though, its a small string being held up by those who actually produce. The same people that you hate and want to tax 50%. The same people you want to murder in le revolution.

File: huey lewis.png (694KB, 620x499px) Image search: [Google]

694KB, 620x499px

The reason why UBI is pushed more now is because of automation fucking over service industry jobs, and fields mutual to it. For example self-driving technology is going to hit drivers, traffic patrols, and mechanics due to cars being safer and using smarter technology to increase its longevity much like how personal computers have advanced to the point where mom and pop computer repair businesses are basically dead. What isn't taken into account is that you're already paying for fewer things, and current costs are going down. The UBI assumes that there will be stores with product, but people that are broke and thus people will go without food. When other tech becomes fully realized such as vertical farms for food needs, energy becomes a few pennies per kW/h or surplus is achieved, then it would be pointless to have a UBI because you would have ownership of the same types of technology that replaced you and not need to pay for things because you already have them. Why would you need a bunch of money for groceries when you have your food ready in your personal farm in the kitchen closet? Why would you need a bunch of money for car insurance, loans, and gas when you can just call in a self driving taxi to get where you need to when you need to? Costs would be cut across the board with capital and land being the only major business expenses left making it only necessary to make $1000 or 2 in a year rather than every month, which Alaska already does just fine.

ubi is not fucking communism you twat it's rectifying the horrible detrimental side effects of unregulated capitalism and corporate domination. Capitalism is still the main mechanism of income, this just ensures that everyone can fucking eat AND it solves the psychological problem of "waaah they're mooching off the government" because everyone gets a little.

>>1676119
Can you name 3?

>>1681476
Not an argument kid, hard data and studies trump random stories every time. Learn what context is, autist.

>>1678069
Nice try but nothing in the foreseeable future can replace a human in machine operation.

Many processes are too complex to automate.

>>1681561
We can tell you are an animal from your double digit IQ shitposting

>>1676107
>it's not always about money. If you had ever held a job you'd understand.

HAHAHAHAHA

AHHHHH


HAAAA


AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[i move away from the mic to breathe]


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>1681761
I'm going with no.

>>1682119
>demands arguments
>throws in ad hominem
Sure, buddy. Where's your argument then?

What is a study? What is hard data? It's just a series of anecdotes. It's literally an aggregate of individually meaningless random stories. An anecdote doesn't become less of an anecdote because it happens in the context of a lab. That's a very dangerous fallacy for scientists. Repeat your experiments or interviews a thousand times and people start listening. But your individual data point is still worthless. The plural of anecdote *is* data.