4 ms·

> I personally don't trust my government (US) to implement this properly without any special niches carved out for someone. This is already the case. Except th

> I personally don't trust my government (US) to implement this properly without any special niches carved out for someone. This is already the case. Except this solution eliminates a lot of the existing opportunities for corruption by generally simplifying the model. > There will absolutely be people who abuse the system and use this money to not cover their required expenses and use it for a variety of things they don't need. It's a thousand bucks- pretty hard to live large on 1k. Besides, comparing the issue of poor people abusing handouts to corporate welfare is molehills to mountains. If your concern is abuse having a detrimental impact on the society as a whole, don't look at poor people.

winslow 12y ago
> It's a thousand bucks- pretty hard to live large on 1k. Besides, comparing the issue of poor people abusing handouts to corporate welfare is molehills to mountains. If your concern is abuse having a detrimental impact on the society as a whole, don't look at poor people. Absolutely, I agree that the corporate welfare is absurd and I was completely against the bailouts. I'm not singling out poor people but rather abusers of the system. I completely understand needing welfare to help you get you back on your feet after being let go from a position. I would also hope that people can budget better in the case of no work for a while.
- lelandbatey 12y ago
  I'm curious about your worry over abusers of the system. Maybe it's the conditions I've lived in, but I always got the sense that abusers of systems where greatly exaggerated. I don't have any hard data to point to, but I thought people like welfare abuseres where a small enough part of the problem as to be effectively inconsequential?
baddox 12y ago
> Except this solution eliminates a lot of the existing opportunities for corruption by generally simplifying the model. But you're just assuming that this exact plan gets implemented, and then gets followed.

winslow 12y ago

> It's a thousand bucks- pretty hard to live large on 1k. Besides, comparing the issue of poor people abusing handouts to corporate welfare is molehills to mountains. If your concern is abuse having a detrimental impact on the society as a whole, don't look at poor people. Absolutely, I agree that the corporate welfare is absurd and I was completely against the bailouts. I'm not singling out poor people but rather abusers of the system. I completely understand needing welfare to help you get you back on your feet after being let go from a position. I would also hope that people can budget better in the case of no work for a while.

lelandbatey 12y ago
I'm curious about your worry over abusers of the system. Maybe it's the conditions I've lived in, but I always got the sense that abusers of systems where greatly exaggerated. I don't have any hard data to point to, but I thought people like welfare abuseres where a small enough part of the problem as to be effectively inconsequential?

baddox 12y ago

> Except this solution eliminates a lot of the existing opportunities for corruption by generally simplifying the model. But you're just assuming that this exact plan gets implemented, and then gets followed.