6 ms·

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery. UBI isn't just about liberty and accelerating ourselves forward (though it's also about that), it's a statement that no matter how dire your circumstances, no matter how useless you are seen to our corporate overlords and private employers, that you belong to society, you are deserving of a modest respectable standard of living, and you are entitled to some of the proceeds of the wealth generated by the land with which you've been excluded.

lanevorockz 7y ago
I believe you haven't worked with homeless people much, but the problem with homeless is NOT poverty. People that have the tendency be homeless are people that don't find their place in society, the lack of order actually brings them relief. Hard problem to solve and it wouldn't be fixed by universal income. We tried convincing homeless people to go into shelters or to at least care a bit for themselves ( free self catered infrastructure like showers ). Best solution so far is a social one where people help them find a new sense of achievement and a place in society. Drugs is also a big problem and probably where all the money from universal income would go to.
- rorykoehler 7y ago
  While I agree I think Ubi would help regardless.
- pnutjam 7y ago
  You are talking about a small percentage of the homeless, plenty of poor people would be helped by this and saved from becoming homeless. They could afford to stay in their rural hometown instead of making their way to the cities where they can currently get help.
- JDiculous 7y ago
  Yes UBI would not "fix" homelessness or poverty, but it dramatically improves things. > People that have the tendency be homeless are people that don't find their place in society, the lack of order actually brings them relief. What an insulting generalization of homeless people. Is that how you rationalize it in your head - these people find "relief" in sleeping on the sidewalk because they couldn't find their place in society? Did you ask those homeless people why they didn't want to go to the shelter? I remember speaking with a 60+ year old homeless woman in NYC once who told me she refused to go to the shelter because it was filled with crazy people. Also you have to check out of the shelter every day, and if you don't check back in by a certain time, then they can't let you in. It shouldn't come as a surprise that many would prefer to sleep on the streets than deal with that. > Best solution so far is a social one where people help them find a new sense of achievement and a place in society. This is why I'm a proponent of a jobs guarantee. Anyone who wants to work should not be denied the opportunity to do so. > Drugs is also a big problem and probably where all the money from universal income would go to. Yes, because all homeless people are drug addicts right? /s
DubiousPusher 7y ago
Especially in our time now when the relative cost of these things is so low. And worse even still is the atrocious conditions in jails and prisons in the U.S. wherein we often end up depositing people who need not be there if simply supplied necessities at a much lower cost without incarceration.
sub7 7y ago
Agreed that everyone deserves a basic standard of living as a human right but disagree that UBI is the path to that. Giving money to people instantly creates a class of beggars. Beggars with voting rights will vote for people who give them more and more and more for no more work. It's the road to ruin. My suggestion is a set of hospitals, schools and housing that is super basic but sufficient to give people dignity and opportunity. These would be free for anyone, paid for via taxes on capital gains.
- Guest42 7y ago
  A very strange and inaccurate philosophy.
- kevinwang 7y ago
  1. Everyone already has voting rights though, and those in poverty are already incentivized to seek welfare, so how would UBI "create" that? 2. How does your suggestion prevent that?
  - sub7 7y ago
    There's a big difference between money and money that can only be spent on a certain set of services. As far as I know welfare is still food stamps etc i.e. not cash.
    - DagAgren 7y ago
      People know what they need to spend their money on. Telling them what they can and can't do with it is both patronising and counter-productive. Let the person who is affected by the choices make the choices.
      - sub7 7y ago
        Patronizing and counter productive is giving people money for nothing. It's telling people that they're useless. You should read up on the beggar networks in India and the exploitation that occurs when you handout money for no work.
clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
I look at it from a selfish perspective. These "lowlifes" actually drag society down. It benefits me if they are helped.
- asdkhadsj 7y ago
  Yup. I don't agree on the perspective but you're totally right. My wife works in a state with issues like this, and her very modest city (capitol, but not as big as SF or Seattle) has enough homeless people that all sorts of crime is on the rise. Restaurants were closing (before COVID..) because people wouldn't go to the restaurant anymore. There were literal camps in parking lots and the police did nothing. I personally think it's a sad state of our society that we let this happen. These people are either in need of help, or mental help. This is not an acceptable way of living. 1. Give help to all those who simply need some help. 2. Give mental help to those who cannot see living in filth is not a healthy state of being. 3. Let the people who just want to live "free" go live in the woods and form a co-op or something. I unfortunately see no reason why camping on the streets or next to interstates should not be strictly enforced. But to manage this, we need social programs for #1 and #2. These people aren't all criminals, we can't simply lock them up in jail/prisons. It would also exploit them to do so. We need human programs focused on helping people, and fast.
  - pozdnyshev 7y ago
    The American Prison system is the largest healthcare provider in the United States. 2 million people with mental illness are put in jails/prisons every year. We need not only social programs, but to bring back the institutions. State mental hospitals where these people can actually get the care they need and not be subjected to the harsh conditions of our penitentiaries.
jimmysacks 7y ago
Its allowed to continue because some are mentally Ill and refuse to get treated (and we can't force them into treatment) and some make poor life decisions like having multiple children with no means to support them (you have the freedom to do this). You can't just give money to someone mentally Ill or will just squander the money and continue to make bad decisions. We will still have just as much poverty and homelessness.
- JDiculous 7y ago
  Are you kidding me? We literally dump our mental health patients on the streets. [1] How many of the homeless in SF/NYC that you see have kids with them? The mental gymnastics people go through to justify homelessness and poverty is sickening. https://www.kqed.org/news/10737399/nevada-to-pay-san-francisco-400000-over-psychiatric-patient-dumping https://www.kqed.org/news/10737399/nevada-to-pay-san-francis...
  - gph 7y ago
    "In a national survey, 60 percent of homeless women and 41 percent of homeless men had at least one minor child, but only 39 percent of women and 3 percent of men lived with any children (Burt et al., 1999)" [1] Most homeless people have had children, they just get taken away from them. [1]https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/homeless-children-update-research-policy-programs-and-opportunities/children-separated-homeless-families https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/homeless-children-update-researc...
  - jimmysacks 7y ago
    You didn't read my post. We should be forcing the mentally Ill into treatment, not giving them a choice to stay on the streets.
- MrLeap 7y ago
  1000$ a month to every adult wouldn't reduce poverty and homelessness _at all_? Not a teeny tiny bit? Economics sure is unintuitive.
  - 7y ago
Shivetya 7y ago
Poverty and homelessness will not be solved by throwing money around. It only can be solved if society is willing to understand some people need to be told what to do each step of their lives. It will only be solved if people realize that we will actually have to build housing and make people live there. It will only be solved when people realize that once you get them housed you may need to insure their dietary needs are properly met which means someone else choosing what food is provided. Then after the basics of housing, food, and health, are taking care off, then you can just hand them money to do with as they need. The real bugaboo is when someone realizes that China's one child rule may have been too utopian in a future world, as in assistance may come with restrictions on even starting a family or curtailing family size. All UBI programs tested or suggested really are nothing more than allowances and cannot solve the problem. The problem is not cheap nor universal. The universal part should be, you cannot fall below this threshold, not that everyone gets the same benefits. That is only being done to sell it when people should just be told, some people need no help currently. It will be there should they need it but right now they don't. We have many of our problems for two reasons, governments which do not respect the property rights and personal rights of their citizenry and also that there are just people in this world who cannot operate on their own.
- jjgreen 7y ago
  You are right, there are people who cannot operate on their own, and I have decided that you are one of them. So I will tell you where to live, I will tell you what to eat, I will tell you what to wear. Go on, dance like a monkey for me and my superior friends. Not so much fun when the shoe is on the other foot, is it?
- chipsa 7y ago
  Can't go below a threshold. Cool. So threshold is $12k or whatever. Person could work, and get $200 a week. So they get $50 a week in benefits. Or they could not work, and get $250 a week in benefits. So why work? Working more or less in the very low income range doesn't make any difference. So they won't. Not at a 100% income tax rate. That's the point of having it being a fixed amount: you can tax the regular income, so the effective amount they get decreases as they work more, but you don't have perverse incentives to not work.
pozdnyshev 7y ago
Yang's UBI proposal is a myopic and stupendously libertarian policy idea that would deprive the poor of targeted social relief programs they actually need. Can't stress enough how utterly bad it is.
patrickaljord 7y ago
We have UBI in France "RSA" (€556 with no kids, €839 with one kid and €1000 with 2 kids and then €223 per extra kids), we also provide free lodging (logement sociaux) with free healthcare, transportation, electricity and more. We still have a huge amount of homeless people. I believe it is more of a mental issue for people who chose to remain on the street, at least in France but I know it's the case in the US too. Most sane people can find a job and a cheap room to survive. Those who don't usually have mental issues no UBI can solve. I don't know how this can be solved, maybe force people to go to mental institutions? Doesn't sound super glamorous either. The only countries that seem to have solved this problem are either super cold countries or countries where they jail them away.

lanevorockz 7y ago

I believe you haven't worked with homeless people much, but the problem with homeless is NOT poverty. People that have the tendency be homeless are people that don't find their place in society, the lack of order actually brings them relief. Hard problem to solve and it wouldn't be fixed by universal income. We tried convincing homeless people to go into shelters or to at least care a bit for themselves ( free self catered infrastructure like showers ). Best solution so far is a social one where people help them find a new sense of achievement and a place in society. Drugs is also a big problem and probably where all the money from universal income would go to.

rorykoehler 7y ago
While I agree I think Ubi would help regardless.
pnutjam 7y ago
You are talking about a small percentage of the homeless, plenty of poor people would be helped by this and saved from becoming homeless. They could afford to stay in their rural hometown instead of making their way to the cities where they can currently get help.
JDiculous 7y ago
Yes UBI would not "fix" homelessness or poverty, but it dramatically improves things. > People that have the tendency be homeless are people that don't find their place in society, the lack of order actually brings them relief. What an insulting generalization of homeless people. Is that how you rationalize it in your head - these people find "relief" in sleeping on the sidewalk because they couldn't find their place in society? Did you ask those homeless people why they didn't want to go to the shelter? I remember speaking with a 60+ year old homeless woman in NYC once who told me she refused to go to the shelter because it was filled with crazy people. Also you have to check out of the shelter every day, and if you don't check back in by a certain time, then they can't let you in. It shouldn't come as a surprise that many would prefer to sleep on the streets than deal with that. > Best solution so far is a social one where people help them find a new sense of achievement and a place in society. This is why I'm a proponent of a jobs guarantee. Anyone who wants to work should not be denied the opportunity to do so. > Drugs is also a big problem and probably where all the money from universal income would go to. Yes, because all homeless people are drug addicts right? /s

DubiousPusher 7y ago

Especially in our time now when the relative cost of these things is so low. And worse even still is the atrocious conditions in jails and prisons in the U.S. wherein we often end up depositing people who need not be there if simply supplied necessities at a much lower cost without incarceration.

sub7 7y ago

Agreed that everyone deserves a basic standard of living as a human right but disagree that UBI is the path to that. Giving money to people instantly creates a class of beggars. Beggars with voting rights will vote for people who give them more and more and more for no more work. It's the road to ruin. My suggestion is a set of hospitals, schools and housing that is super basic but sufficient to give people dignity and opportunity. These would be free for anyone, paid for via taxes on capital gains.

Guest42 7y ago
A very strange and inaccurate philosophy.
kevinwang 7y ago
1. Everyone already has voting rights though, and those in poverty are already incentivized to seek welfare, so how would UBI "create" that? 2. How does your suggestion prevent that?
- sub7 7y ago
  There's a big difference between money and money that can only be spent on a certain set of services. As far as I know welfare is still food stamps etc i.e. not cash.
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    People know what they need to spend their money on. Telling them what they can and can't do with it is both patronising and counter-productive. Let the person who is affected by the choices make the choices.
    - sub7 7y ago
      Patronizing and counter productive is giving people money for nothing. It's telling people that they're useless. You should read up on the beggar networks in India and the exploitation that occurs when you handout money for no work.

clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago

I look at it from a selfish perspective. These "lowlifes" actually drag society down. It benefits me if they are helped.

asdkhadsj 7y ago
Yup. I don't agree on the perspective but you're totally right. My wife works in a state with issues like this, and her very modest city (capitol, but not as big as SF or Seattle) has enough homeless people that all sorts of crime is on the rise. Restaurants were closing (before COVID..) because people wouldn't go to the restaurant anymore. There were literal camps in parking lots and the police did nothing. I personally think it's a sad state of our society that we let this happen. These people are either in need of help, or mental help. This is not an acceptable way of living. 1. Give help to all those who simply need some help. 2. Give mental help to those who cannot see living in filth is not a healthy state of being. 3. Let the people who just want to live "free" go live in the woods and form a co-op or something. I unfortunately see no reason why camping on the streets or next to interstates should not be strictly enforced. But to manage this, we need social programs for #1 and #2. These people aren't all criminals, we can't simply lock them up in jail/prisons. It would also exploit them to do so. We need human programs focused on helping people, and fast.
- pozdnyshev 7y ago
  The American Prison system is the largest healthcare provider in the United States. 2 million people with mental illness are put in jails/prisons every year. We need not only social programs, but to bring back the institutions. State mental hospitals where these people can actually get the care they need and not be subjected to the harsh conditions of our penitentiaries.

jimmysacks 7y ago

Its allowed to continue because some are mentally Ill and refuse to get treated (and we can't force them into treatment) and some make poor life decisions like having multiple children with no means to support them (you have the freedom to do this). You can't just give money to someone mentally Ill or will just squander the money and continue to make bad decisions. We will still have just as much poverty and homelessness.

JDiculous 7y ago
Are you kidding me? We literally dump our mental health patients on the streets. [1] How many of the homeless in SF/NYC that you see have kids with them? The mental gymnastics people go through to justify homelessness and poverty is sickening. https://www.kqed.org/news/10737399/nevada-to-pay-san-francisco-400000-over-psychiatric-patient-dumping https://www.kqed.org/news/10737399/nevada-to-pay-san-francis...
- gph 7y ago
  "In a national survey, 60 percent of homeless women and 41 percent of homeless men had at least one minor child, but only 39 percent of women and 3 percent of men lived with any children (Burt et al., 1999)" [1] Most homeless people have had children, they just get taken away from them. [1]https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/homeless-children-update-research-policy-programs-and-opportunities/children-separated-homeless-families https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/homeless-children-update-researc...
- jimmysacks 7y ago
  You didn't read my post. We should be forcing the mentally Ill into treatment, not giving them a choice to stay on the streets.
MrLeap 7y ago
1000$ a month to every adult wouldn't reduce poverty and homelessness _at all_? Not a teeny tiny bit? Economics sure is unintuitive.
- 7y ago

Shivetya 7y ago

Poverty and homelessness will not be solved by throwing money around. It only can be solved if society is willing to understand some people need to be told what to do each step of their lives. It will only be solved if people realize that we will actually have to build housing and make people live there. It will only be solved when people realize that once you get them housed you may need to insure their dietary needs are properly met which means someone else choosing what food is provided. Then after the basics of housing, food, and health, are taking care off, then you can just hand them money to do with as they need. The real bugaboo is when someone realizes that China's one child rule may have been too utopian in a future world, as in assistance may come with restrictions on even starting a family or curtailing family size. All UBI programs tested or suggested really are nothing more than allowances and cannot solve the problem. The problem is not cheap nor universal. The universal part should be, you cannot fall below this threshold, not that everyone gets the same benefits. That is only being done to sell it when people should just be told, some people need no help currently. It will be there should they need it but right now they don't. We have many of our problems for two reasons, governments which do not respect the property rights and personal rights of their citizenry and also that there are just people in this world who cannot operate on their own.

jjgreen 7y ago
You are right, there are people who cannot operate on their own, and I have decided that you are one of them. So I will tell you where to live, I will tell you what to eat, I will tell you what to wear. Go on, dance like a monkey for me and my superior friends. Not so much fun when the shoe is on the other foot, is it?
chipsa 7y ago
Can't go below a threshold. Cool. So threshold is $12k or whatever. Person could work, and get $200 a week. So they get $50 a week in benefits. Or they could not work, and get $250 a week in benefits. So why work? Working more or less in the very low income range doesn't make any difference. So they won't. Not at a 100% income tax rate. That's the point of having it being a fixed amount: you can tax the regular income, so the effective amount they get decreases as they work more, but you don't have perverse incentives to not work.

pozdnyshev 7y ago

Yang's UBI proposal is a myopic and stupendously libertarian policy idea that would deprive the poor of targeted social relief programs they actually need. Can't stress enough how utterly bad it is.

patrickaljord 7y ago

We have UBI in France "RSA" (€556 with no kids, €839 with one kid and €1000 with 2 kids and then €223 per extra kids), we also provide free lodging (logement sociaux) with free healthcare, transportation, electricity and more. We still have a huge amount of homeless people. I believe it is more of a mental issue for people who chose to remain on the street, at least in France but I know it's the case in the US too. Most sane people can find a job and a cheap room to survive. Those who don't usually have mental issues no UBI can solve. I don't know how this can be solved, maybe force people to go to mental institutions? Doesn't sound super glamorous either. The only countries that seem to have solved this problem are either super cold countries or countries where they jail them away.