4 ms·

There is only one ultimate solution: Basic Income. We need to end the division between those who receive welfare and those who don't. We can do this by having e

There is only one ultimate solution: Basic Income. We need to end the division between those who receive welfare and those who don't. We can do this by having everyone receive the same amount regardless of means. For the last few decades we have been making up for job loss due to automation by creating ever larger bureaucracies. Consider how much paperwork is now involved in healthcare compared to 50 years ago. While we might be able to continue this foolishness for some time (after all, what's 100,000 pages of tax code compared to 100,000,000?) we only hurt ourselves as a whole by doing so.

sukilot 12y ago
I used to think basic income was effective poverty-welfare. No I realize that basic income is a bulwark against enslavement of the masses by the elites.
- ThomPete 12y ago
  And security for the elite that there is in fact a mass market for them to sell their products to.
  - tomjen3 12y ago
    There is no point in making products people can buy if I also have to give them the money to pay me.
    - ThomPete 12y ago
      Oh but there is. Thats how it works today it's just conditional rather than unconditional and a lot of those money are being given to corporations as tax deductions and subsides not to those who actually need it.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
ra1n85 12y ago
So we need basic income collected and delivered by a government bureaucracy to prevent further growth of government bureaucracies?
- ThomPete 12y ago
  There will be no bureaucracy to deliver basic income. Same amount to everyone unconditional. Thats basically a large part of what the bureaucracy normally spend their time on. Further more it will always be beneficial to work since it's unconditional.
- transfire 12y ago
  Basic Income would reduce bureaucracy significantly b/c it is not means-based -- means testing is the source of almost all the bureaucracy in our current welfare systems (of which there are many). We can eliminate (almost) all means based systems and replace them with a single Basic Income system.
  - ra1n85 12y ago
    This doesn't sound very well thought-through. Where will this income come from? Who will determine it? Who will distribute it? How will it be regulated? What if other nations don't do the same? How does that impact immigration policy? What will be done to address current outstanding national debts? Income tax is the US's primary tax revenue source. How will this account for cost of living (e.g., NY vs WV)? Do we need a basic rent, too? Who will determine that cost of living? The questions go on. On the whole, this sounds like just a more comfortable form of serfdom.
    - blumkvist 12y ago
      commies don't think about consequences. They just like to dream. Everyone is equal and lived happily ever after. No connection to the real world at all. I consider it the ultimate form of narcissism. Thinking so highly of themselves that they forget that humans are nothing more than animals. The nastiest kind out there too.
    - 12y ago
tomjen3 12y ago
It would cost far too much money. Most people would quit their jobs, go on BI only and bring the system down. Not to mention that once 50% are on this any politician can win by promising to raise BI, but so can his opponent, which translate to the both of them have to keep promising to raise it indefinitely. Are you prepared to require a net contribution of taxes as a means to get the vote?
- transfire 12y ago
  Not really. I've run the figures. The U.S. already spends about $1 trillion on welfare every year. A BI would not cost much more than that. And that doesn't even count the benefits in reduced crime and boosts to higher education. A proper BI system will be, at least partially, self-balancing and should have some guards against endless fiddling.
patrickaljord 12y ago
If I spend all my basic income on booze or drugs or gambling and have an accident, should I be left dying or should I still get welfare? And if we still need welfare, what's the use of basic income?

sukilot 12y ago

I used to think basic income was effective poverty-welfare. No I realize that basic income is a bulwark against enslavement of the masses by the elites.

ThomPete 12y ago
And security for the elite that there is in fact a mass market for them to sell their products to.
- tomjen3 12y ago
  There is no point in making products people can buy if I also have to give them the money to pay me.
  - ThomPete 12y ago
    Oh but there is. Thats how it works today it's just conditional rather than unconditional and a lot of those money are being given to corporations as tax deductions and subsides not to those who actually need it.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

ra1n85 12y ago

So we need basic income collected and delivered by a government bureaucracy to prevent further growth of government bureaucracies?

ThomPete 12y ago
There will be no bureaucracy to deliver basic income. Same amount to everyone unconditional. Thats basically a large part of what the bureaucracy normally spend their time on. Further more it will always be beneficial to work since it's unconditional.
transfire 12y ago
Basic Income would reduce bureaucracy significantly b/c it is not means-based -- means testing is the source of almost all the bureaucracy in our current welfare systems (of which there are many). We can eliminate (almost) all means based systems and replace them with a single Basic Income system.
- ra1n85 12y ago
  This doesn't sound very well thought-through. Where will this income come from? Who will determine it? Who will distribute it? How will it be regulated? What if other nations don't do the same? How does that impact immigration policy? What will be done to address current outstanding national debts? Income tax is the US's primary tax revenue source. How will this account for cost of living (e.g., NY vs WV)? Do we need a basic rent, too? Who will determine that cost of living? The questions go on. On the whole, this sounds like just a more comfortable form of serfdom.
  - blumkvist 12y ago
    commies don't think about consequences. They just like to dream. Everyone is equal and lived happily ever after. No connection to the real world at all. I consider it the ultimate form of narcissism. Thinking so highly of themselves that they forget that humans are nothing more than animals. The nastiest kind out there too.
  - 12y ago

tomjen3 12y ago

It would cost far too much money. Most people would quit their jobs, go on BI only and bring the system down. Not to mention that once 50% are on this any politician can win by promising to raise BI, but so can his opponent, which translate to the both of them have to keep promising to raise it indefinitely. Are you prepared to require a net contribution of taxes as a means to get the vote?

transfire 12y ago
Not really. I've run the figures. The U.S. already spends about $1 trillion on welfare every year. A BI would not cost much more than that. And that doesn't even count the benefits in reduced crime and boosts to higher education. A proper BI system will be, at least partially, self-balancing and should have some guards against endless fiddling.

patrickaljord 12y ago

If I spend all my basic income on booze or drugs or gambling and have an accident, should I be left dying or should I still get welfare? And if we still need welfare, what's the use of basic income?