Would Universal Basic Income actually be beneficial to the right?

>>133009272
its not just about UBI
they have tricked themselves into believing in surplus "theft"

UBI is the epitome of r-selection and r-selection is cancer to civilization. Get fucked, commie.

>Universal Basic Income
this meme again

It's only fun if a few people get it.

>>133009272
>If most people were comfortable with UBI, not everyone would be clamoring for political power
Wishful thinking, they'd be going after more. Women and blacks in general take a lot more out of the system than they put in, and it's not enough...it'll never be enough.

>>133009894

But that's kind of the point. The r-selected people will always be r-selected, so might as well keep them at the bottom of the hierachry via UBI, and the k-selected will be able to achieve more. Without UBI the r-selected folks will start revolutions or demand more power and thus have more influence

>>133009272
Fuck no - hell no, it's only the necessity of work right now that's keeping the bulk of would-be liberal activists from being more politically active.

>>133009272
You would have to cut existing benefits and drastically slash the administrative state to afford it, so I imagine a lot of liberals would actually be against it.

>>133010193

Newsflash for you, OP: if you can't compete against r-strategists then you aren't a K-strategist.

The answer is allowing the collapse to run its course, not taking on more unsustainable debt to keep the specter of free resources.

>>133009272
How would you establish UBI? What numerical guarantee would there be that people would be comfortable with it and for how long before they start to want more than what their neighbor has?

>>133009272

It wouldn't get anyone to shut up, least of all libs and niggs.

As soon as UBI is a thingmpeople will clamor for more because 'it's not a living income in San Francisco' or some other form of retarded shit.

>>133009272
Neo feudalism and enslavement to the state

>>133010783

Satiating the r-strategists to the point where they stop complaining is a form of competition.

>>133009272
Why don't niggers who advocate for UBI understand inflation?

>>133009272
no they wouldn't
they would just demand more free stuff

>hurr cost of living is going up because everyone has more money
>we need more reparations and stuff

>>133009272

Pretty sure it's a bait, I'll go for it nontheless. Note: I'm no scholar in economics as well as politics - it reflects my mere opinion.

There are 3 categories of goals humans can have:

1) low effort, low reward
2) high effort, high reward
3) unrealistic effort, no reward

Activities that fall in category 1 are usually fast-paced things, underlying the law of diminished returns (eating fast food, 10 sex partners/week and so on). With increasing time they will lead to depression, because you recept the rewards as increasingly unsatisfying, ultimately culminating in self-destruction and utter unhappyness. Goals of category 3 are not reachable. You can put as much effort into it, you won't achieve it (e.g. an African that wants to build a rocket to colonize mars, to exaggerate a bit) which has the same consequences as only pursuing category 1. What makes people happy are the goals of category 2:
Usually, people taking care solely of themselves, lifing self-sustained, have most of their activities (such as hunting, growing food, maintenance) in category 2. Because they need high effort, they also get high reward - as in: survive. This kind of goals makes people happy. They have a purpose in life - sustain themselves, their families (and maybe small parishes) and preserve the surroundings, in order that their children can have the same or better opportunities.

Now comes the problem: Because of our highly "technologized" world, humans have - for the most part - only goals and activities available that belong to either category 1 or 3, because survival isn't a thing in our society anymore. Anyone, even bums, can tell you, not matter how "bad in a situation they see themselves".
What's the consequence ? People will strive to do shit to set themselves goals they think belong to category 2. But as 99.99% fall into categories 1 and 3, they will make up, even create themselves, causes which they fight then can fight against on social and economical ....

1/?

This is so dumb that you have to be a leftist pretending to be right-wing.

>>133011492

>Satiating the r-strategists to the point where they stop complaining is a form of competition.

No, that's called enabling them.

>>133011903

levels in order to delude themselves they're having a cause. Some do it in a Christian or Buddhist sense - by living compassionate. These people tend to be actually happy. But that's far from being the norm - as we all can observe every day.

Now to the basic income: As you see, the problem in first place is that "everything is taken care of already" by the system and it will do anything to prevent people from dieing (contrary to "going to shit"), because no people mean no system.
So if you'd implement the basic income, you could be sure a 100% that this particular """problem""" (in the eyes of the people) would be fixed but they would convienently just make up other problems, they could [rainbow] knight for. See gay rights, trans rights, hate speech, x, y, z, ... the list is endless.

Until people cannot learn to abandon instant gratification and delusions - and just live [whether in alignment with God or Nature or whatever] - and most importantly destroy the financial system that runs on an exponential function through usury - making people mindless slave drones through technological means and the "efficiency-hype" in first place - there will be no change.

There. Will. Be. No. Change. Before.

2/2

>>133009272
In the USA, identity politics is entirely about hatred of the white man and having UBI would simply give the coalition of minorities more time to obsess over that hatred

>>133012460

Until people learn to*

File: cleese.jpg (5KB, 218x231px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 218x231px

>>133009272
the reason why identity politics is pushed by regular citizens is literally because they are so comfortable they have no other problems

>>133009272
But the blacks already have this and it's the reason they're no longer kangz and shit. Welfare slows the human need to progress, without fear of having nothing most people would become gelatinous slaves to the nanny state.

>>133010422

>TFW my mate's sister is dating a literal commie who told me he stays on benefits on purpose to be a fulltime activist

No nigger, go back to Africa.

>>133011492
>>133012298

Lol samefag

Be cruel, remove all welfare, replace it with a negative income tax.

>>133012460

addition:

I mean look at the resentment unbiased.
>the poor have too few, the rich too much
But do they ? Just as poor people, they get up, take a dump, try to earn money, eat, care for their children (hopefully), have some freetime, eat again, go to bed and repeat.
If you factor out all the fancy and shiny shit, rich people live just the same lifes.
Now what is it that people are enraged about ? That Trump eats caviar ? Or that [insert random musician] drives a Lamborghini ? People envy the most hollow shit you can think of. This is not about "we're actually disadvantaged". It's about "I want the same shiny shit they have and I want it without puttin in the effort", because they're being fed this narrative from the beginning on.
Typical division of the people. There's no uniting cause and the system will do it's thing to make sure it prevails.

Note: I'm not rich myself. I started out poor, graduated in theoretical physics and chemistry and now I'm middle class. And I basically live the exact same life as before, just with a bigger flat and a """better""" car

>>133009272

>it would get people to stfu

You are talking about niggers. And not just black niggers, but anyone who feels they "deserve" another person's labor, wealth, and property because they exist. Niggers are never satisfied with what they now have, they will always "need" more. Today they "need" healthcare from cradle until they are 95 and need hip surgery, all on my dime. Tomorrow they will "need" a bigger house. They will "need" a car. They will "need" educations for their 12 children they can't feed except on the income I give them.

Never give an inch to niggers.

>>133009272
>this would accomplish the goal of basically getting people to shut the fuck up

They would never shut up. The left's entire playbook is whining and playing the victim, they would still find shit to complain about, because that's all they know how to do.

>>133009272
Why do you want to end identity politics?

>>133011583
>Why don't niggers who advocate for UBI understand inflation?
If you replace all currency creation (monetary policy) so it could only be created as it was distributed by UBI and you only created enough so that currency held it's value not inflating or deflating.

Then what?

>>133009272
> Would taking other people's money be beneficial to conservatism
OP is a Pole

>>133009272
UBI for specific groups within Whites would be good. UBI on a large scale will be a necessity once automation kicks into high gear.

>>133009272
People in the west are more comfortable than ever before in history and the people who have it best (upper middle class liberals) are also complaining and rioting in the streets. UBI will be the death of mankind. EVERYONE will be unhappy, everyone will find things to complain and riot about because they have no purpose in life and are not challenged by their environment.

File: 1499571190567.gif (2MB, 228x170px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 228x170px

>>133009272
Go fuck yourself, communist swine.
UBI is literally fucking communism.
The only economic system that is "Right-Wing" are free markets.

>>133014140
Explain how a UBI is incompatible with a market based economy.

>>133009272
>and identity politics would severely decrease

No. Identity politics only goes one way.

File: 1499623250070.gif (249KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 500x375px

>>133014270
>How is theft incompatible with free markets
Gee, that's a toughie.

Fuck off, slaver.

>>133014452
How is distributing new currency to the people rather than creating all new money as bank debt theft?

Or do you think banks have some right to make all currency and have people pay them for the privilege?

UBI/NIT is a great idea but it MUST be paired with the repeal of all social welfare programs perhaps with the exception of health care. No food stamps, no housing assistance, no per-child benefits.

>>133015066
Why?

>>133014452

Austrian economic theory is just as much an utopy as communism is.
I admire Hoppe and Rothbard, but it's just not practical or even applicable in reality. Because similar to other ideological utopies, it relies on the very fact that "everyone everywhere" does it. And this is not going to happen - sadly I gotta admit, but I have to. Because the problem in the end is not "who will build roads lel" or shit, but how you're going to implement it. And just as communism, it would need big government and shit to enforce it in first place before you actually abandon it (yeah, it doesn't work with communism, it doesn't work either with ancapism) and live the utopy.

File: 1499598476548.jpg (621KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

621KB, 1200x800px

>>133014983
All you have is that straw man?

Fuck off. I would have zero compunction in killing would be thieves like yourself. Back to your porn, serf. The rest of us have to work to support your NEET lifestyle.

>>133015144
Means-tested benefit systems reduce the marginal value of earned income which is a disincentive to work. Besides that, providing per-child benefits to mothers is a socially corrosive and frankly dysgenic practice.
All of these programs have massive administrative overhead that could be eliminated with direct disbursal of funds.
And the combination of the two would be ridiculously unaffordable.

File: 1499296189440.gif (449KB, 229x173px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 229x173px

>>133009272

People would blow this money on iphones and other bullshit instead of necessities like health savings accounts and long term investments.

Millennials are particularly susceptible to this, that is why I am very much against giving free money to anyone who doesn't work for it.

>>133015460
>All you have is that straw man?
I asked why UBI can't be used with a market economy. You replied that it's theft without answering the question.
I explain a system of UBI that uses no taxes to fund it.

You state that's a strawman, which just for your own information is not actually the correct meaning of strawman because you haven't made any statements that I'm misrepresenting.

>Fuck off. I would have zero compunction in killing would be thieves like yourself. Back to your porn, serf. The rest of us have to work to support your NEET lifestyle.
In other words you have no idea what you are talking about, have given no thought to the topic and are not able to conduct yourself like an adult.

>>133015716
Fine. Fuck 'em. Imagine a society where nobody buys your sob story because everyone knows exactly how big your monthly check is.

File: 1498627019186.png (436KB, 1006x935px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1006x935px

>UBI
>I want big daddy state to decide how much gibs I get and what is "livable wage"
>Any inflation at all with UBI not rising to compensate
>Entire population under livable wage

Retarded. Literally communism without people actually working.

I don't know how you managed to make a less functional, even more retarded version of communism. But you did.

Literally: What if communism, but you don't have to work?

>>133009272
While in theory it would be better than the welfare system, there is a major flaw.

People will just keep voting for a higher and higher UBI until it is unsustainable.

>>133015708
So you think that a UBI can't exist beside social programs because of cost.

What if the UBI was 'paid' out of the creation of new currency replacing the current system of make all money bank debt and borrowing new money into existence, and cost nothing other than the distribution costs which you point out would be very low comparatively.

Could we then still maintain a system of for example disability coverage for injured workers?

>>133016050
>Literally: What if communism, but you don't have to work?
Sound like we have robots doing all the work for us.

File: 1499227315424.jpg (102KB, 577x728px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 577x728px

>>133009272

UBI would not be free. Your purchases would be tracked, your budget would be shared (and possibly "corrected") by the state. Falling afoul of the state would make it incredibly easy to "starve you out" and even detect "dissent" before it even had a tangible form.

>>133016416
While the "inflation will cancel it out" people are idiots (how much will inflation have to rise to make some positive number = 0?), there's still a kernel of truth in there. I'm not an economist but I don't believe in free monies, go crazy with it and you will fuck everything up.

>>133016471
And the people that own the are going to just take care of everyone out of pocket.

File: photo.jpg (105KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 900x900px

>>133009272
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDkHLPanjkQ

>>133016601
cash

>>133016201
I actually don't worry too much about this. First, people haven't demanded UBI yet, the general feeling is one of great skepticism. Second, higher UBI reduces your advantage as a working person vs the unemployed. And if there's one thing people like more than having money it's knowing their neighbor has less than them.

>>133009272
>identity politics would severely decrease.
no it would increase because people would want a group they can claim to be a part of to get more

>>133016738
Well the key is like everything to have a proper balance. I freely admit that too much or too little new money will cause inflation or deflation.

The A-B=C theory for social credit solves the question of how much money is made.

Take every sale made to people, or if you were a European something that would have a VAT charged. Call that A.

Take all the compensation paid to people as wages, benefits or dividends. Call that B.

When you subtract A-B you end up with a number that is the exact amount of currency you need to create within the economy to hold the current value of the money over some reasonable time period (3 months, 4, a half year something).

>>133009272
>implying westerners don't already get UBI because their mommy and daddy give them a shit-ton of money.You're basically crying that state-sponsored UBI will somehow make people lazy and umotivated but you forget the fact that most of you are leeches to society and your parents who probably work their ass off so their autistic kid gets to jerk off and take part in the great meme war--glorified children.

It's not communism you retarded burgers.It's always fascinating to see how much propaganda has been fed into you by some cool and hip cultish youtube intellectual.If anything, UBI is the final admission that capitalism finally delivered on its promises.
There is much work to be done in the world.Useful work.But this work does not get repayed in the current system.

I'm not necesseraly in support of UBI but unless you've got an above 120 IQ and are ready to face the incoming dark enlightment where the rest of the elites just move to Shanghai and mind their own bussniess while you and the rest of the world suffers then I'd love to hear what your solutions for overcoming the second industrial revolution are.

>>133017266
>And if there's one thing people like more than having money it's knowing their neighbor has less than them.

Sounds like some pathetic white person's mantra. Read the chronicles

>>133011492
Stop.

File: cwctake.gif (4MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 500x281px

>>133017227

They won't distribute it via cash. It will be done via card, because it's "more efficient" and "its the future" and "its easier to track fraud and waste." EBT cards ("food stamps") are the model. Retarded millennials will go along with this.

We asked the NSA to monitor terrorists and wound up with the recordings and metadata of every email sent and every phone call made in a government database. This won't even involve "overreach" -- this vast data gorge is by design.

>>133017602
I don't mean that literally but income is the primary method of dickmeasuring in societies that are stable enough that you can't just use violence. I don't think it's particularly a white thing. I'm not going to read whatever that is.

>>133016915
>And the people that own the are going to just take care of everyone out of pocket.
No, they will sell to people their products and services so they can become wealthy and spend their money on non automated service if they want or just buying more expensive automated service from different providers.

The owners make the products and people buy them with their UBI. The owners become wealthy and the people become fulfilled consumers. Even with high automation some people will still work, either for money or for fun. The motivated will get ahead while consumers rest and enjoy their life as they can with their income.

>Would Universal Basic Income actually be beneficial to the right?
Yes. Privatize everything, remove welfare, fire the bureaucrats and hand out checks instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM

>>133009272

Universal Basic Income is INCOMPATIBLE with democracy.

If you insensitive people to do nothing, most will happily do so. The actually motivated ones will hold the brunt of the economy on their backs, getting ripped off royally to feed the complacent majority. What do you think the said majority do with their political power ? Demand more gibs of course. So that the actual producers either be literally enslaved to work for free, or they drop out of the economy and join the slobs. Either way the system would collapse as it will grow out of control and crash to a halt.


So, If you apply for the UBI, you should be stripped out of your voting power as you no longer produce for your nation and should not have a say how it's run.

File: asdasdad.jpg (130KB, 333x500px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 333x500px

>>133017991
What if someone's sick and or disabled and requires more each month than a "livable wage" cheque?

>>133009272
>identity politics would severely decrease.
Blacks would demand more, women would demand more. The thing is, democrates will demand more and more no matter how much they get.

>>133018271
Their family, friends or charity can take care of them.

>>133018271
>What if someone's sick and or disabled and requires more each month
Die and stop sending your family to the poor house.

>>133018183

Some people work, most is done by automation. Those working people sell their goods and services for a profit at a price they set.

Yet somehow you say this is slavery and is incompatible with voting for government.
I don't think you have put enough time into thinking about this topic.

>>133013756
Why would people bother working, excluding the rare few who genuinely enjoy their jobs or have some higher purpose in their heart?

>>133009272
It actually would benefit me, but I would never support it or participate in it because I don't feel I have a right to money I didn't earn. I'd much rather live poor off my own sweat than live comfy off the sweat of better men.

I'll always stand against UBI. NEETS and niggers should starve to death if they don't want to work.

>>133019200
I can't even tell you how many young men I've met who work long hours at shit jobs and blow the majority of their income on cars or motorcycles. Higher purpose in their heart my ass.

>>133018793
What he said wasn't that complicated yet somehow that's what you took from it.

>I don't think you have put enough time into thinking about this topic.

I'm afraid this applies to you.

>>133019200
>Why would people bother working, excluding the rare few who genuinely enjoy their jobs or have some higher purpose in their heart?

Because they want to get wealthy and buy more than they can with a UBI.
They have an interest that they can't pursue on their own and need to join a larger organization.
Because the actual work isn't that hard and they pay is great.

>>133019809
How much per person do you think a UBI should pay?

This is gonna be good

UBI is shit. The dregs of humanity will just demand more and more money until we reach peak communism, then millions die.

>>133009272

Bullshit. You can never have too much free shit. Whining is eternal.

>>133009272
that's insane, there's no way the West and developing East could give a US middle-class life to the billions in poverty.

>>133019719
>What he said wasn't that complicated yet somehow that's what you took from it.
Yeah but it's making a huge number of unfounded assumptions.

He assume that their will be no market economy any more and that producers can't set prices.
>motivated ones will hold the brunt of the economy on their backs, getting ripped off royally to feed the complacent majority.

That somehow the people can identify people that do work and force them to work without compensation of any kind even while people are being given a UBI... What are they spending it on again, if they are just making the people that do work to give away their products?
>the actual producers either be literally enslaved to work for free

It's less an argument against UBI as it is an argument against democracy.

File: Fraggio.jpg (26KB, 400x399px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x399px

>>133020312
I'm also curious about the actual amount. Would you say $500 a month? Can you survive on that in the States?

>>133019949
>How much per person do you think a UBI should pay?
>This is gonna be good
>>133017529
A-B=C
C / total population = amount given per period of time.

This number scales up and down depending on what the production and consumption is, how much productivity their is (the degree of automation).
As automation goes up the amount people get paid also goes up. If we find a use for lots of people the amount paid goes down as more people work.

The ability to consume and produce is limited by the physical ability to produce goods and services and the desire of people to consume.

>>133020591
I'm waiting for him to answer this too so I can multiply it by the US population and laugh as he tries to explain where all that money is going to come from.

>>133020939
So 1 dollar a person?

>>133020591

Not even close.

Maybe if you live in a tent in the desert or something.

NO! we all deserve the right to better our lives - ubi takes away any incentive to do anything ever. Plus the world has already tried this multiple times and it has failed. USSR, China, N Korea, Venzuela

>>133021026
>So 1 dollar a person?
Likely low.

Take the total amount of money that is created by current monetary police and then expanded by fractional reserve banking, then reduce that by some fraction lets say 10%.

That's likely a reasonable ballpark number to start with at our current levels of automation.

If we ever do get a cheap dependable multi purpose robot worker expect to see that number sky rocket as productivity goes through the roof and people become massively more wealthy.

If the government and large cooporations already own the land and already enslave you to it there is no chance of ever knowing a free market and most of the population in the US would greatly benefit from a universal basic income because they have no land or resources to themselves to enter into this fabled free market to exploit and enslave that which exists within to produce and barter trades and wares and services.

>>133020984
>>133021097
Oh. There was something else i wanted to hit with.
If it is indeed $500 - that's exactly average joe's income tax. Let's say 40k a year. 15% for the sake of simplicity, it's just over the bracket i think. That's 6k, 500 a month.
I was going to ask why doesn't anyone meme abolishment of income tax, but i see it would not be enough.

>>133019949
>How much per person do you think a UBI should pay?
https://niskanencenter.org/blog/universal-basic-income-is-just-a-negative-income-tax-with-a-leaky-bucket/

File: 1497978228535.gif (549KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 320x240px

>>133009272
>this would accomplish the goal of basically getting people to shut the fuck up

yeah, now they'd surely be contempt and stop asking for more

>>133021842
*content

sorry

unless you own land there's no reason to even fight for capitalism unless that capitalism which enslaved you to it protects you with it and takes care of your every need. domesticated by it and molded by it with no means to change leads to starvation and death. there's no jobs there's no education there's nothing to do but be a slave and fend for yourself against your fellow citizen, government, and nature.

File: 1355526325027.jpg (30KB, 292x348px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 292x348px

>>133018793

ok, let me explain this in small fractions you might understand

UBI is made by taking taxes from the producers in society

UBI is given to everyone

everyone have a right to vote

(almost) everyone vote for more UBI

more taxes are issued on the backs of the producers

to the point they either get demotivated and stop producing or the taxes reach 100% of the produced in effect making them slaves

so if everyone have the right to vote under UBI system the system will fall
Is that comprehensible enough or do you want me to dumb it down further ?

>>133022092
blah blah blah - the producers are overly rich and need their money taken away, because most of it is scammed from the rest of society, and they are greedy hoarders. Fuck off

>>133022375
this

>>133022092
But the plebs already vote for as much as they can. How does UBI make any difference? In fact if you remove government programs you'd end up with fewer government employees which in turn should reduce the incentive for the public to vote for higher taxes.

UBI will be needed if automation starts rising, in fact, the first ones to ask for it will be the companies, as they need costumers with money to spend.

>>133022092
>ok, let me explain this in small fractions you might understand
>UBI is made by taking taxes from the producers in society
That's the second most terrible way to fund it out of all of the options. The only worse way is to borrow it from commercial banks inflating the money supply away into hyperinflation.

>to the point they either get demotivated and stop producing or the taxes reach 100% of the produced in effect making them slaves
No you said literal slaves. Which is almost the exact opposite of what you said now, 'in effect making them slaves'.

>Is that comprehensible enough or do you want me to dumb it down further ?
Explain how it's fundamentally different than being able to vote for higher taxes now to fund more social services and how people currently don't just all vote for more taxes and more transfers.

What you did was create a poor argument against democracy not UBI.

>>133022092
>(almost) everyone vote for more UBI
How do you explain how we've gotten this far without everybody voting for UBI in the first place? If this is an inevitable outcome the only answer is to abolish democracy and become a monarchist or something.

Because most countries wouldnt be able to support the financial requirement of giving every citizen free money

>>133021801
>The representative proposal is $10,000 per person per year. That implies an over $3 trillion dollar price tag.

10k a year isn't shit in my city. I spend 10 grand in 5 months just on rent kek

>>133023131
What would you do with an extra $10K a year?

I think most people would spend most or all of it. A few would put aside some but those saving more than $1K of it would be very rare.

>>133023131
It's a supplement, you're not meant to live on it for your entire life.

>>133023131
If you're an unemployable poorfag maybe you should move to a different city and/or live with roommates? This is why basic income should not be conflated with a living wage, people cannot fathom the idea that maybe they're too worthless to live in a high-rent area.

>>133009272

Only if we substitute low jobs with robots, the humanity research science and space travelling and exterminate inferior races who don't bring that.

>>133009272
UBI would allow people to purchase things they never would have been able to, and as a reaction to higher taxes and more buyers companies will raise prices and the white middle class (republican voters) gets fucked. UBI is simply not feasible unless everyone is poor.

>>133009272
No. fuck off shill

File: 1303981405642.jpg (11KB, 366x266px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 366x266px

>>133022689

>That's the second most terrible way to fund it out of all of the options. The only worse way is to borrow it from commercial banks inflating the money supply away into hyperinflation.

How will the magical utopia thing be funded if not through taxes ? If such ingenious method exists why are we not using it today ?

>No you said literal slaves. Which is almost the exact opposite of what you said now, 'in effect making them slaves'.

working without payment is slavery

>Explain how it's fundamentally different than being able to vote for higher taxes now to fund more social services and how people currently don't just all vote for more taxes and more transfers.

we do, it's called a social state, in some countries the tax burden goes over 50% income tax to fund a bloated social programs conglomerate that will pale in comparison to the UBI

>What you did was create a poor argument against democracy not UBI.

I created argument you can either have any, not both.

>>133024049
>How will the magical utopia thing be funded if not through taxes ? If such ingenious method exists why are we not using it today ?
>>133017529
It's not used today because it guts the profitability of the banking sector.

We replace monetary policy of making new money by borrowing from banks, to having the needed currency being created and directly distributed to the population to spend into the economy.

>>133010193
>The r-selected people will always be r-selected,

R/K can be changed with social norms.

>>133023716
>companies will raise prices
That pretty silly. You're ignoring market forces and presuming the consumers entirely depend on the mercy of companies. Let's say the rent goes up in the same area some family lives in. Why wouldn't that family just move elsewhere to a nicer neighborhood? And if you say the prices rise across the board because everyone gets UBI, that's silly too. Where is the extra money coming from? So the answer like any economist will tell you, should be that an increase in prices should be correlated to an increase in the money supply.

>>133023409
I'd buy weed, I'm not even going to lie about it kek

>>133023479
I pay 2 k a month in rent, obviously I'm not unemployed kek.

>>133023455
Sure, a supplement that costs 3 trillion dollars.

>>133024668
Yeah no shit cunt. Why bring up the fact that it wouldn't pay your rent? Do you think the point is to allow you to quit your job?

>>133024648
>Why wouldn't that family just move elsewhere to a nicer neighborhood?

They don't want to pull their kids out of school every time rent goes up or quit their jobs to move. Also, if prices go up wouldn't the UBI have to go up with them? eventually the UBI would be worthless due to inflation if it didn't get increased. Also, at what age would an American be allowed to collect a UBI? Can't start them off at birth because people will have kids to collect more like they do here in Alaska with our PFD which is running out now.

>>133025100
No, my point is that 10k free money isn't worth 3 trillion in debt every year.

Not that complicated if you aren't a moron.

>>133024668
>I'd buy weed, I'm not even going to lie about it kek
Do you think that the dealer would see a lot more business and in turn have a lot more disposable income of his own?

>>133024668
>costs 3 trillion dollars
Hmm, it's almost like you didn't read the article. You get a lot of that money right back. And if we presume the market reduces prices, by privatizing currently government provided services people (the middle class anyway, but probably lower too because they get stiffed by poorer counties as well) should end up with better service and more disposable income. The point here is ultimately to reduce bureaucracy waste. The over 70% of funds intended for entitlements should be put to better use and converted to UBI.

>They don't want to pull their kids out of school every time rent goes up or quit their jobs to move.
Jesus christ can you think on a time span larger than a month? Ignoring market forces again.

>Also, if prices go up wouldn't the UBI have to go up with them?
That's retarded. Why would state revenue increase? You should be looking at UBI amount as a percentage of state spending.

>>133024648
My thinking goes like this:
>poor people cannot afford some products because they need to use the money elsewhere on clothes, food, and education
>UBI implemented
>now poor people have enough money to buy necessities
>price of necessities go up because there is less supply and more demand
>middle class gets hit with the UBI tax and the rising price of necessities so they have less money overall

>>133025106
>Can't start them off at birth because people will have kids to collect more
Easier ways to make a few thousand than raising a kid for 18 years.

>>133025330
Weed is legal in my state so the dealer wouldn't see anything. Store owners would but most of them are already extremely wealthy at this point so it wouldn't change much here especially with weed prices going down to competitive levels with street dealers.

I'd actually like to see the impact it would have on a state with a black market now that you bring that up though.

>>133025511
>>price of necessities go up because there is less supply and more demand
Why would an economy have more supply than demand for necessities? Wouldn't it be almost perfectly balanced?

Also as demand went up wouldn't the economy also increase production to maximize profits?

>>133025511
>there is less supply
Didn't realize clothes and food are inelastic markets.

>>133009272
>this would accomplish the goal of basically getting people to shut the fuck up
lmao

>>133025806
The UBI will set a higher cap on necessities because companies will get taxed as well. They still have to make a profit after all those taxes.

>>133025187
>noone in burgerland makes more than 10k a year so everyone would quit their job and live off the gib
makes sense

>>133023455
Bullshit. Why do liberals call it a "livable amount" when you the question of how much comes up. People will take ubi as an amount you're supposed to be able to live off of comfortably and will bitch for more when it turns out they can't afford Macs and lambos like all the rich white businessmen.

>>133009272
>identity politics
>a bad thing
The only people who don't engage in identity politics are white conservatives, and look where that's got us.

>>133026112
>Why do liberals call it a "livable amount"
Because they're idiots.

UBI is already here people dont die from starvation in the western world.

The real question is how can we implement real capitalism because the current system is just capitalism light.

>>133025556
>10k per person
>have 10 kids

100 grand a year. Sure there are easier ways but that doesn't mean people aren't going to abuse the system. There is easier ways to make money than pumping out babies and collecting welfare per head but people still do it.

>>133025472
Maybe I'm reading the article wrong but the article pretty much states the UBI wouldn't work and is pushing for NIT to replace all types of welfare. I have a question though, it say's

>Multiplying the average transfer by the number of actual individuals in each grouping and summing, I arrived at total cost of $182 billion—roughly the combined budget for SSI, SNAP and EITC.

So those programs would be phased out? Wouldn't that mean the people in those programs would actually be collecting less Government money under NIT since it would cover everyone including those who can get government aid but don't?

I'm honestly trying to understand this.

File: Universal Basic Income explained.jpg (22KB, 440x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 440x360px

UBI doesn't work because it's just distributing wealth to people that don't contribute to society. People that do contribute to society don't need it, because they get paid.

The actual solution is to wipe out 80 percent of the world so that the other 20 percent can use it to advance humanity.

>>133026723
Under capitalism that 20 percent needs the 80 percent for their spending power. Someone has to buy the 1500 yeezys

>>133026684
>the UBI wouldn't work and is pushing for NIT
It's saying that it's better with a steeper curve that allows productive people to keep more of their money. I'd agree with it, but seeing how UBI has gathered all this popularity I'll just go with the flow given that they have such similar function.

>So those programs would be phased out?
Ideally, yes.

>Wouldn't that mean the people in those programs would actually be collecting less Government money under NIT
Why is less gibs a bad thing?

>>133024415
>to having the needed currency being created and directly distributed to the population to spend into the economy.


you mean printing money, because that was tried several times and it crashed every economy that tried it via massive inflation spike

>>133027213
>Why is less gibs a bad thing?

It's not. NIT actually sounds a lot like welfare reform to me which is can get behind.

>>133009272
I own a second home I rent out, If UBI goes into effect, I will raise rent by the amount of the UBI. Double UBI for me, none for renters anywhere.

>>133027787
>I will raise rent by the amount of the UBI

You'll probably make less than you do now doing that

>>133028139
how so?

>>133028252
Because your real estate isn't worth that much. You can't just magically increase ROI by throwing the plebs some cash. You might see temporary gains by screwing over some people but in the long term those gains will disappear.

>>133009272
Still needs to be regulated, though. As a government you don't want to give free money to a criminal or a drug addict, since that money will go to organized crime etc.

Background checks, Background checks, Background checks.
You only want good citizen who will put that money right back in the economy.