4 ms·

To be fair, the USA federal government has plenty of money to pay for programs like this, they just choose not to. The lion's share of the money goes to the mil

by sparrc 6y ago

To be fair, the USA federal government has plenty of money to pay for programs like this, they just choose not to. The lion's share of the money goes to the military, so there's quite a lot of room to re-allocate funds that would directly benefit people. Napkin math: 4,000,000 babies per year in the USA * $6750 = $27 billion. USA 2020 defense budget: $738 billion So this would cost ~3.5% of the 2020 annual budget of the defense department.

lisper 6y ago
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current system depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work. If everyone were a millionaire, the result would not be a bunch of happy, financially independent people, it would be rampant inflation while the newly expanded money supply went chasing after what remained of a rapidly shrinking pool of accumulated goods, and then, when those were gone, we'd end up right back where we started, just with a few extra zeros on all the price tags.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- sparrc 6y ago
  The proposal isn't to make everyone a millionaire, it's to give everyone an index investment at birth that they can't touch until they retire, at which point it would presumably be worth around a million dollars. btw I'm not saying this is a good idea, I just wanted to make the point that there is plenty of money to pay for something like this.
- pmoriarty 6y ago
  "Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current system depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work." Not just to do the work, but also to do the dying. Enlisting in the military is often a resort of financially destitute people who don't see many other options.
  - brewdad 6y ago
    It's not something most people want to admit given the US worship of our veterans but the military in the past 40 years has largely been a successful jobs program.
    - pmoriarty 6y ago
      "the military in the past 40 years has largely been a successful jobs program" Well, among other things, like participating in mass murder.
    - bassman9000 6y ago
      It's not something most people want to admit I think it's pretty well known and understood. Not only a successful jobs program: a training/education one too, and the prime social ladder.
- throwaway2245 6y ago
  > depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work. Which is maybe why Bill Ackman's proposal here doesn't really make money accessible to working-age people, when they most need it to set up a less hairy lifestyle.
pmoriarty 6y ago
The spending on the military is actually much larger, because the US also spends a lot of money on veterans. $250.9 billion for 2021, according to this article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-2509-billion-2021-veterans-affairs-budget/ar-BB179Gdv https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-2509-bi...
dismalpedigree 6y ago
Medicare and social security are significantly higher and growing faster than military spending. They are the lions share.
- sparrc 6y ago
  sure, although seems a little disingenuous to compare those since medicare and social security are not funded via regular federal income taxes, they are taxed in their own dedicated categories and rates.
nceqs3 6y ago
Military spending is around 15 percent of total federal spending. Definitely not the "lion's share of the money". https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defense-spending-too-high-too-low-or-just-right/ https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defens...
- sparrc 6y ago
  It's the single largest category of spending, outside of medicare and social security, which are taxed and funded within their own category separate from regular income taxes, and are "mandatory spending". Also note that Brookings tends to lean pro-military so 15% is likely an under-representation. If you remove mandatory spending it's more like 50%: https://prospect.org/economy/tax-dollars-really-go/ https://prospect.org/economy/tax-dollars-really-go/
mordymoop 6y ago
So weird to me that nobody has managed to package social support as a matter of defense.

by sparrc 6y ago

lisper 6y ago

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current system depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work. If everyone were a millionaire, the result would not be a bunch of happy, financially independent people, it would be rampant inflation while the newly expanded money supply went chasing after what remained of a rapidly shrinking pool of accumulated goods, and then, when those were gone, we'd end up right back where we started, just with a few extra zeros on all the price tags.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
sparrc 6y ago
The proposal isn't to make everyone a millionaire, it's to give everyone an index investment at birth that they can't touch until they retire, at which point it would presumably be worth around a million dollars. btw I'm not saying this is a good idea, I just wanted to make the point that there is plenty of money to pay for something like this.
pmoriarty 6y ago
"Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current system depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work." Not just to do the work, but also to do the dying. Enlisting in the military is often a resort of financially destitute people who don't see many other options.
- brewdad 6y ago
  It's not something most people want to admit given the US worship of our veterans but the military in the past 40 years has largely been a successful jobs program.
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    "the military in the past 40 years has largely been a successful jobs program" Well, among other things, like participating in mass murder.
  - bassman9000 6y ago
    It's not something most people want to admit I think it's pretty well known and understood. Not only a successful jobs program: a training/education one too, and the prime social ladder.
throwaway2245 6y ago
> depends on keeping a cadre of people on the financial hairy edge so that they can be coerced into doing the actual work. Which is maybe why Bill Ackman's proposal here doesn't really make money accessible to working-age people, when they most need it to set up a less hairy lifestyle.

pmoriarty 6y ago

The spending on the military is actually much larger, because the US also spends a lot of money on veterans. $250.9 billion for 2021, according to this article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-2509-billion-2021-veterans-affairs-budget/ar-BB179Gdv https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-2509-bi...

dismalpedigree 6y ago

Medicare and social security are significantly higher and growing faster than military spending. They are the lions share.

sparrc 6y ago
sure, although seems a little disingenuous to compare those since medicare and social security are not funded via regular federal income taxes, they are taxed in their own dedicated categories and rates.

nceqs3 6y ago

Military spending is around 15 percent of total federal spending. Definitely not the "lion's share of the money". https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defense-spending-too-high-too-low-or-just-right/ https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defens...

sparrc 6y ago
It's the single largest category of spending, outside of medicare and social security, which are taxed and funded within their own category separate from regular income taxes, and are "mandatory spending". Also note that Brookings tends to lean pro-military so 15% is likely an under-representation. If you remove mandatory spending it's more like 50%: https://prospect.org/economy/tax-dollars-really-go/ https://prospect.org/economy/tax-dollars-really-go/

mordymoop 6y ago

So weird to me that nobody has managed to package social support as a matter of defense.