Opportunity - The gift our country gives to all (1 Viewer)

[tonysmiles]

Opportunity that is the beautiful gift this country gives to all regardless of gender race creed or socioeconomic background. Take every baby born today 06 September 2022 in this country of ours regardless of gender, creed, race or socioeconomic background the minute they exit that womb and take there first gasp of air they all have the same opportunity to do great things. How they navigate what life throws in front of them because not everybody will have the same upbringing determines their success but anybody can be successful and we have seen it from children born into poverty to those born into wealth they all can succeed. What I find interesting is Republicans tout the opportunity this great country gives you and wants to incorporate a level of self responsiblity if you squander that opportunity. Democrats all they want to do is uplift those who squandered there opportunity via social programs and have those that succeeded pay for it. The interesting thing is those that squandered the opportunity 99% of the time is of there own self doing. Example I have children wife and I gave them a nuclear family, we ate dinner as a family every night, attended all the same schools, had the opportunity to do whatever after school program they like but boy did they travel various paths in life. One is going to on to a successful career, and the other is struggling to make it day to day because they did not take advantage of the opportunity. Now the child that is struggling says I wish I made better choices when I was young because it gets harder when you have children and you get older. We need to do away with these social programs that prop up those that chose to make bad choices. Now those that have an illness and cannot function need help but why do we continue to help; but those that made the bad choices themselves should not receive any social welfare because all it does is create a safety net and reliance on the government. It needs to stop.

 

[The Commish]

Opportunity that is the beautiful gift this country gives to all regardless of gender race creed or socioeconomic background. Take every baby born today 06 September 2022 in this country of ours regardless of gender, creed, race or socioeconomic background the minute they exit that womb and take there first gasp of air they all have the same opportunity to do great things. How they navigate what life throws in front of them because not everybody will have the same upbringing determines their success but anybody can be successful and we have seen it from children born into poverty to those born into wealth they all can succeed. What I find interesting is Republicans tout the opportunity this great country gives you and wants to incorporate a level of self responsiblity if you squander that opportunity. Democrats all they want to do is uplift those who squandered there opportunity via social programs and have those that succeeded pay for it. The interesting thing is those that squandered the opportunity 99% of the time is of there own self doing. Example I have children wife and I gave them a nuclear family, we ate dinner as a family every night, attended all the same schools, had the opportunity to do whatever after school program they like but boy did they travel various paths in life. One is going to on to a successful career, and the other is struggling to make it day to day because they did not take advantage of the opportunity. Now the child that is struggling says I wish I made better choices when I was young because it gets harder when you have children and you get older. We need to do away with these social programs that prop up those that chose to make bad choices. Now those that have an illness and cannot function need help but why do we continue to help; but those that made the bad choices themselves should not receive any social welfare because all it does is create a safety net and reliance on the government. It needs to stop.

What does this word mean to you? And what specific thing are you speaking of that is THE "opportunity" you talk about in this post?

 

[BassNBrew]

There's opportunity and then there's OPPORTUNITY

 

[HellToupee]

The questions continue

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

 

[The Commish]

The questions continue

Kinda necessary in this case given, as written, the comments make zero sense if one applies the commonly used definition most people know/use. So, instead of making assumptions, I'm asking for clarification. Sorry if that's a problem to you

 

[(HULK)]

Opportunity that is the beautiful gift this country gives to all regardless of gender race creed or socioeconomic background. Take every baby born today 06 September 2022 in this country of ours regardless of gender, creed, race or socioeconomic background the minute they exit that womb and take there first gasp of air they all have the same opportunity to do great things. How they navigate what life throws in front of them because not everybody will have the same upbringing determines their success but anybody can be successful and we have seen it from children born into poverty to those born into wealth they all can succeed. What I find interesting is Republicans tout the opportunity this great country gives you and wants to incorporate a level of self responsiblity if you squander that opportunity. Democrats all they want to do is uplift those who squandered there opportunity via social programs and have those that succeeded pay for it. The interesting thing is those that squandered the opportunity 99% of the time is of there own self doing. Example I have children wife and I gave them a nuclear family, we ate dinner as a family every night, attended all the same schools, had the opportunity to do whatever after school program they like but boy did they travel various paths in life. One is going to on to a successful career, and the other is struggling to make it day to day because they did not take advantage of the opportunity. Now the child that is struggling says I wish I made better choices when I was young because it gets harder when you have children and you get older. We need to do away with these social programs that prop up those that chose to make bad choices. Now those that have an illness and cannot function need help but why do we continue to help; but those that made the bad choices themselves should not receive any social welfare because all it does is create a safety net and reliance on the government. It needs to stop.

I think that, while equality of opportunity is the goal, we are far from having it exist. Case in point, because I was rich enough, when my daughter hit middle school age we moved to a better school district so she could attend one of the top public schools in the nation. My old neighbors who didn't have the same financial means, their children do not have an equal opportunity.

Second point, I know people don't like to talk about it, but we're NOT born equal. Using fictional examples, but coming out the womb Forrest Gump and Will Hunting were going to have very different lives, regardless of whatever life threw at them and whatever opportunities occurred for them. To say that they had equal opportunity is inaccurate IMO.

 

[(HULK)]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

I think that's the future, but we're not ready for it to be the now IMO

 

[Boston]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

What happens if they don't figure it out?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

What happens if they don't figure it out?

What happens today?

I am assuming that you are asking what happens when we give someone $x every month (or every whatever) and they squander it all on vices rather than on survival.? What do we do then? If not, then I'm answering the wrong question.

I think for most people this creates a live and learn be more responsible incentive. So doing nothing will work itself out most of the time. There will be some people where no amount of incentive is going to matter. But of course, what happens to these people if we cut it all off as the OP suggests? I think that for those exceptions that simply cannot function (and assuming society cannot live with that) that there would need to be "nanny state" management of their income. Basically, what the various programs do today. So, if you believe that this is most all welfare recipients then we need to keep the welfare state as it is and the idea that "shutting it all off" solves anything can be summarily dismissed. If you believe that most people will figure it out soon enough such that the "free market" isn't cruel exploitation, then we deal with exceptions as exceptions rather than the rule.

 

[(HULK)]

What happens if they don't figure it out?

What happens today?

I am assuming that you are asking what happens when we give someone $x every month (or every whatever) and they squander it all on vices rather than on survival.? What do we do then? If not, then I'm answering the wrong question.

I think for most people this creates a live and learn be more responsible incentive. So doing nothing will work itself out most of the time. There will be some people where no amount of incentive is going to matter. But of course, what happens to these people if we cut it all off as the OP suggests? I think that for those exceptions that simply cannot function (and assuming society cannot live with that) that there would need to be "nanny state" management of their income. Basically, what the various programs do today. So, if you believe that this is most all welfare recipients then we need to keep the welfare state as it is and the idea that "shutting it all off" solves anything can be summarily dismissed. If you believe that most people will figure it out soon enough such that the "free market" isn't cruel exploitation, then we deal with exceptions as exceptions rather than the rule.

Survivable income dispersals would have to be daily to prevent squandering.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Survivable income dispersals would have to be daily to prevent squandering.

Ignoring whether I agree with the idea or not*, technology has made this doable and relatively cheap.

*Because I'd need to think whether this is better or worse especially considering monthly bills probably dominate most people's routine spending.

 

[timschochet]

@tonysmiles

While I find myself disagreeing with most of your political positions, I DO agree with you that opportunity of economic success is a key element of the greatness of this country.

 

[FairWarning]

@tonysmiles

While I find myself disagreeing with most of your political positions, I DO agree with you that opportunity of economic success is a key element of the greatness of this country.

Agree. A lot of countries do not offer any opportunity, which is why the US is very attractive to others.

 

[FairWarning]

Opportunity that is the beautiful gift this country gives to all regardless of gender race creed or socioeconomic background. Take every baby born today 06 September 2022 in this country of ours regardless of gender, creed, race or socioeconomic background the minute they exit that womb and take there first gasp of air they all have the same opportunity to do great things. How they navigate what life throws in front of them because not everybody will have the same upbringing determines their success but anybody can be successful and we have seen it from children born into poverty to those born into wealth they all can succeed. What I find interesting is Republicans tout the opportunity this great country gives you and wants to incorporate a level of self responsiblity if you squander that opportunity. Democrats all they want to do is uplift those who squandered there opportunity via social programs and have those that succeeded pay for it. The interesting thing is those that squandered the opportunity 99% of the time is of there own self doing. Example I have children wife and I gave them a nuclear family, we ate dinner as a family every night, attended all the same schools, had the opportunity to do whatever after school program they like but boy did they travel various paths in life. One is going to on to a successful career, and the other is struggling to make it day to day because they did not take advantage of the opportunity. Now the child that is struggling says I wish I made better choices when I was young because it gets harder when you have children and you get older. We need to do away with these social programs that prop up those that chose to make bad choices. Now those that have an illness and cannot function need help but why do we continue to help; but those that made the bad choices themselves should not receive any social welfare because all it does is create a safety net and reliance on the government. It needs to stop.

I think that, while equality of opportunity is the goal, we are far from having it exist. Case in point, because I was rich enough, when my daughter hit middle school age we moved to a better school district so she could attend one of the top public schools in the nation. My old neighbors who didn't have the same financial means, their children do not have an equal opportunity.

Second point, I know people don't like to talk about it, but we're NOT born equal. Using fictional examples, but coming out the womb Forrest Gump and Will Hunting were going to have very different lives, regardless of whatever life threw at them and whatever opportunities occurred for them. To say that they had equal opportunity is inaccurate IMO.

We may not be born equal, but the US rewards hard work and success the best.

 

[Sabertooth]

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

 

[Shula-holic]

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

I’m 100% in agreement there needs to be some capital gains reform. It’s way more impactful than continuing to raise the top rate for earned income. That only taxes the people at the lower end of the high income scale. I’m not sure where you’re getting the $90k though.

 

[BladeRunner]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

What happens if they don't figure it out?

The same people who whined about giving people a BIG will be back saying we now need to give a BIG-Backup. And when they squander that then they'll be whining for a BIG-Backup-Backup. It will never end.

 

[(HULK)]

Opportunity that is the beautiful gift this country gives to all regardless of gender race creed or socioeconomic background. Take every baby born today 06 September 2022 in this country of ours regardless of gender, creed, race or socioeconomic background the minute they exit that womb and take there first gasp of air they all have the same opportunity to do great things. How they navigate what life throws in front of them because not everybody will have the same upbringing determines their success but anybody can be successful and we have seen it from children born into poverty to those born into wealth they all can succeed. What I find interesting is Republicans tout the opportunity this great country gives you and wants to incorporate a level of self responsiblity if you squander that opportunity. Democrats all they want to do is uplift those who squandered there opportunity via social programs and have those that succeeded pay for it. The interesting thing is those that squandered the opportunity 99% of the time is of there own self doing. Example I have children wife and I gave them a nuclear family, we ate dinner as a family every night, attended all the same schools, had the opportunity to do whatever after school program they like but boy did they travel various paths in life. One is going to on to a successful career, and the other is struggling to make it day to day because they did not take advantage of the opportunity. Now the child that is struggling says I wish I made better choices when I was young because it gets harder when you have children and you get older. We need to do away with these social programs that prop up those that chose to make bad choices. Now those that have an illness and cannot function need help but why do we continue to help; but those that made the bad choices themselves should not receive any social welfare because all it does is create a safety net and reliance on the government. It needs to stop.

I think that, while equality of opportunity is the goal, we are far from having it exist. Case in point, because I was rich enough, when my daughter hit middle school age we moved to a better school district so she could attend one of the top public schools in the nation. My old neighbors who didn't have the same financial means, their children do not have an equal opportunity.

Second point, I know people don't like to talk about it, but we're NOT born equal. Using fictional examples, but coming out the womb Forrest Gump and Will Hunting were going to have very different lives, regardless of whatever life threw at them and whatever opportunities occurred for them. To say that they had equal opportunity is inaccurate IMO.

We may not be born equal, but the US rewards hard work and success the best.

I agree but honestly, I've never really looked at a metric to prove it.

I do think that there are probably people out there who worked harder than Jeff Bezos and are still barely getting by. As such, whatever the equation for X = Success here, X is clearly more than just hard work.

 

[(HULK)]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

What happens if they don't figure it out?

The same people who whined about giving people a BIG will be back saying we now need to give a BIG-Backup. And when they squander that then they'll be whining for a BIG-Backup-Backup. It will never end.

I just don't think we're automated enough for a BIG, but I do think that day is coming in my lifetime. And when that happens, it's either BIG or a bloody revolt, I suspect we'll choose BIG.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The same people who whined about giving people a BIG will be back saying we now need to give a BIG-Backup. And when they squander that then they'll be whining for a BIG-Backup-Backup. It will never end.

Like the backup to the welfare we have today? Sure, there will still be a role for private charities and churches and whatever to fill these needs.

 

[Shula-holic]

The anecdote is the enemy of good policy, or in this case even a basic understanding of who our safety net supports. I mean maybe one in six on the high side have simply squandered opportunity. Maybe!

But ignoring that, I'm all in favor of eliminating the needs based, means tested welfare state and eliminating any welfare traps and just give everyone a survivable level income and let them figure it out from there.

What happens if they don't figure it out?

The same people who whined about giving people a BIG will be back saying we now need to give a BIG-Backup. And when they squander that then they'll be whining for a BIG-Backup-Backup. It will never end.

That's my thought as well. Many proponents of BIG are for more social safety programs in general. Nobody wants to see people go hungry, but when we put the personal responsibility on these folks to manage the money they'd receive, some inevitably will. Are we willing to see innocent children go hungry if their parent(s) squander the money? If we aren't, the cost model of the program isn't valid because we are going to have to come up with more social backstops.

There may be some proponents perfectly willing to see that and be firm in enforcing it, but I suspect we aren't really ready for that. If we truly would end all the other programs and just have this one, sure I'd be open to seeing the math and how the costs line up. I have my doubts, but it would have to start with it being limited to a BIG alongside an elimination of other programs that pay for it to show that it truly is a net positive.

 

[Sabertooth]

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

I’m 100% in agreement there needs to be some capital gains reform. It’s way more impactful than continuing to raise the top rate for earned income. That only taxes the people at the lower end of the high income scale. I’m not sure where you’re getting the $90k though.

Sorry the number is $80,800 tax free capital gains for married couple filing jointly. I was going off the top of my head and thought it was $88,000.

 

[Shula-holic]

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

I’m 100% in agreement there needs to be some capital gains reform. It’s way more impactful than continuing to raise the top rate for earned income. That only taxes the people at the lower end of the high income scale. I’m not sure where you’re getting the $90k though.

Sorry the number is $80,800 tax free capital gains for married couple filing jointly. I was going off the top of my head and thought it was $88,000.

If you don’t have a single other dollar of income. It’s a nice trick if you can pull that off. It’s only mathematically possible for people who make that or less so you and your wife combined couldn’t make a dollar in any other way. $80k combined wouldn’t be a huge living and that’s why it’s taxed as such. I’m not advocating it be treated differently than a couple who made that through earned income but it’s not really a fair characterization to say $80,800 in cap gains are tax free as that would be an extraordinary obscure incidence.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Are we willing to see innocent children go hungry if their parent(s) squander the money? If we aren't, the cost model of the program isn't valid because we are going to have to come up with more social backstops.

And as more people see they can blow their money and get more stuff the conclusion is inevitable.

 

[Boston]

Are we willing to see innocent children go hungry if their parent(s) squander the money? If we aren't, the cost model of the program isn't valid because we are going to have to come up with more social backstops.

And as more people see they can blow their money and get more stuff the conclusion is inevitable.

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

 

[Sabertooth]

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

I’m 100% in agreement there needs to be some capital gains reform. It’s way more impactful than continuing to raise the top rate for earned income. That only taxes the people at the lower end of the high income scale. I’m not sure where you’re getting the $90k though.

Sorry the number is $80,800 tax free capital gains for married couple filing jointly. I was going off the top of my head and thought it was $88,000.

If you don’t have a single other dollar of income. It’s a nice trick if you can pull that off. It’s only mathematically possible for people who make that or less so you and your wife combined couldn’t make a dollar in any other way. $80k combined wouldn’t be a huge living and that’s why it’s taxed as such. I’m not advocating it be treated differently than a couple who made that through earned income but it’s not really a fair characterization to say $80,800 in cap gains are tax free as that would be an extraordinary obscure incidence.

I flip houses. I don’t make any other income. My wife makes income that is taxed as such. I buy a house, hold for a year and sell.

the USA rewards capital gains, not hard work. At least speaking tax wise. Who gets capital gains? Wealthier people do of course. So not only do they earn money without working, but it isn’t taxed at all up to about $90,000.

I’m 100% in agreement there needs to be some capital gains reform. It’s way more impactful than continuing to raise the top rate for earned income. That only taxes the people at the lower end of the high income scale. I’m not sure where you’re getting the $90k though.

Sorry the number is $80,800 tax free capital gains for married couple filing jointly. I was going off the top of my head and thought it was $88,000.

If you don’t have a single other dollar of income. It’s a nice trick if you can pull that off. It’s only mathematically possible for people who make that or less so you and your wife combined couldn’t make a dollar in any other way. $80k combined wouldn’t be a huge living and that’s why it’s taxed as such. I’m not advocating it be treated differently than a couple who made that through earned income but it’s not really a fair characterization to say $80,800 in cap gains are tax free as that would be an extraordinary obscure incidence.

I flip houses for a living. I let somebody rent for a year and then flip it. I don’t think capital gains and income run concurrently. Money earned is either one or the other.

 

[Sabertooth]

In my experience wealthy people get a lot more aid than poor people. In my little town the two biggest PPP people raked in 4 million bucks between them. They own Verizon stores and Dominoes. They didn’t even slow down but got millions to pay their payroll. That’s a lot of welfare lobsters.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

 

[FairWarning]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

 

[Mitchie]

Hey everyone, let me take a sample size of two that represents my family and come to a grandiose conclusion about life in America.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

If we implement a UBI China, Korea, etc. are going to shut down factories? They are going send shipping containers to West Africa and South East Asia? People with reasonably decent paying jobs in shipping and trucking and whatever are going to choose in mass to live off of poverty level income? Again, we'll be pointing to exceptions.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

Another vote for expanding the welfare and nanny state. Because if a UBI cannot work, then certainly doing nothing or even less would be worse. And the status quo is failing.

 

[(HULK)]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Since the poor spend more and save less by the nature of needing to spend that money to survive, this would indeed have economic impacts.

But when 60% of jobs are automated away in the future, we're gonna need it or deal with widespread revolts.

 

[(HULK)]

UBI will have to be a daily dispersal IMO.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Since the poor spend more and save less by the nature of needing to spend that money to survive, this would indeed have economic impacts.

Sure, it will have economic impacts simply from removing distortions in the various markets where government picks corporate welfare winners with its need-based entitlements. Not to mention all of the bureaucrat and ordinary worker jobs of those that administer the existing welfare programs becoming obsolete. I mean there is a reason why this was the conservative alternative to the welfare state only becoming an idea from mostly the left when the right started to question out loud doing anything at all for the impoverished. Such as the suggestion in the first post of this thread. But I'm okay with replacing the welfare state with an UBI and giving 100% of the credit to a right winger, or even the right wing.

Sad that the mostly conservative sourced solutions (this and others) of not so long ago are now all branded as evil socialism. Replaced often with no solutions at all or solutions that would work (like the ObamaCare replacement) if they actually funded it (which is never part of the plan).

 

[FairWarning]

I’m surprised all of the immigrants want to come here instead of a country with a UBI.

 

[The Commish]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

There's a small conflation of thoughts here though I do agree that if we engage a UBI sort of solution, there will be a period of adaptation where things like supply chains (US portions anyway) will likely be affected. We can see the potential of a UBI concept in our bankruptcy numbers during 2021 after basically a year of $600 a week payments for unemployment.

 

[FairWarning]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

There's a small conflation of thoughts here though I do agree that if we engage a UBI sort of solution, there will be a period of adaptation where things like supply chains (US portions anyway) will likely be affected. We can see the potential of a UBI concept in our bankruptcy numbers during 2021 after basically a year of $600 a week payments for unemployment.

It’s one of the biggest things I noticed from the COVID shutdowns - people adapted and just spent less. That’s fine until inflation appears. Employers have to pay more to get people, prices go up, and that $600 isn’t worth $600 anymore.

 

[The Commish]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

There's a small conflation of thoughts here though I do agree that if we engage a UBI sort of solution, there will be a period of adaptation where things like supply chains (US portions anyway) will likely be affected. We can see the potential of a UBI concept in our bankruptcy numbers during 2021 after basically a year of $600 a week payments for unemployment.

It’s one of the biggest things I noticed from the COVID shutdowns - people adapted and just spent less. That’s fine until inflation appears. Employers have to pay more to get people, prices go up, and that $600 isn’t worth $600 anymore.

Inflation is always a concern in approaches like this.

 

[(HULK)]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

There's a small conflation of thoughts here though I do agree that if we engage a UBI sort of solution, there will be a period of adaptation where things like supply chains (US portions anyway) will likely be affected. We can see the potential of a UBI concept in our bankruptcy numbers during 2021 after basically a year of $600 a week payments for unemployment.

It’s one of the biggest things I noticed from the COVID shutdowns - people adapted and just spent less. That’s fine until inflation appears. Employers have to pay more to get people, prices go up, and that $600 isn’t worth $600 anymore.

Inflation is always a concern in approaches like this.

Another reason I think UBI has to wait for the future. If everything is highly automated, supply costs on labor will race towards zero, so a UBI would help offset that.

 

[FairWarning]

Yup...zero doubt that happens...most sane people want to help others but unless there is accountability on how the $ is spent it has no chance of working...so much of today's politics is being happy about that initial price-tag and then moving on and not caring whether the $ is being used correctly or if the program is even working...that disconnect has to stop.

The purpose of a UBI is to give people cash to put them above the poverty line without interfering with any market. Where individuals can be the best judge of how to spend it. You know conservative economics 101, day 1. Thus, there is no such thing as not using the dollars correctly. Accountability? That is a disconnect.

If your argument is that people cannot be trusted to be participants making choices in the free market then all of those conservative, free market economic principles go out the window. Pretty much all of it! Even if your assertion is that just "poor people" cannot be trusted. Sure, there are exceptions, but one accounts for exceptions in policy rather than base policy around them.

Many rich people spend up to their income also. Look at all of the broke athletes.

I thought we learned this lesson during covid about giving money out, then people deciding to work less. The supply chain still hasn’t recovered.

There's a small conflation of thoughts here though I do agree that if we engage a UBI sort of solution, there will be a period of adaptation where things like supply chains (US portions anyway) will likely be affected. We can see the potential of a UBI concept in our bankruptcy numbers during 2021 after basically a year of $600 a week payments for unemployment.

It’s one of the biggest things I noticed from the COVID shutdowns - people adapted and just spent less. That’s fine until inflation appears. Employers have to pay more to get people, prices go up, and that $600 isn’t worth $600 anymore.

Inflation is always a concern in approaches like this.

Another reason I think UBI has to wait for the future. If everything is highly automated, supply costs on labor will race towards zero, so a UBI would help offset that.

Or we can not work at all anymore and be even more reliant on China.

 

[Stealthycat]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

 

[Mitchie]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

 

[Stealthycat]

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

justification is what that is

many people born into poverty have great lives, many of single parent homes have great lives .... don't judge them please before they've even had a chance to make choices

 

[(HULK)]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

I agree that those things can provide opportunity, but you're missing the biggest factor. The social economic status of the family you are born into is the greatest potential differentiator in opportunity for people in this country.

 

[Sabertooth]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

This is a great example of conservatism according to Frank Wilhoit- “There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Rich people can still get abortions as they always have and will. Poor people not so much.

Abortions is kind of a perfect storm in the way it truly only impacts poor folks. It keeps the cycle of poverty working because let’s face it, the rich need desperately poor people to man those Walmarts and work those fields. If we don’t have desperate poor, the rich cannot keep making more money by underpaying them grossly.

Another benefit of abortion ban is now those who are stuck with extra kids can be easily identified and judged and dismissed as loose or inmoral women, which frees up the Christian’s to judge and scorn them with glee.

This also helps with the guilt that should accompany denying poor children food and healthcare and housing. Well we can’t go giving those whores free money, they’ll just have more kids and smoke more weed. It would be immoral to enable such awful subhumans.

With Christians it seems that the abortion issue is a convenient way to “hurt the right people (poor and/or non-white) while sidestepping all guilt and “saving the babies.” It’s disgusting. It’s dishonest. And dare I say it’s evil. God will hopefully judge this harshly if indeed there is an afterlife.

 

[FairWarning]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

This is a great example of conservatism according to Frank Wilhoit- “There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Rich people can still get abortions as they always have and will. Poor people not so much.

Abortions is kind of a perfect storm in the way it truly only impacts poor folks. It keeps the cycle of poverty working because let’s face it, the rich need desperately poor people to man those Walmarts and work those fields. If we don’t have desperate poor, the rich cannot keep making more money by underpaying them grossly.

Another benefit of abortion ban is now those who are stuck with extra kids can be easily identified and judged and dismissed as loose or inmoral women, which frees up the Christian’s to judge and scorn them with glee.

This also helps with the guilt that should accompany denying poor children food and healthcare and housing. Well we can’t go giving those whores free money, they’ll just have more kids and smoke more weed. It would be immoral to enable such awful subhumans.

With Christians it seems that the abortion issue is a convenient way to “hurt the right people (poor and/or non-white) while sidestepping all guilt and “saving the babies.” It’s disgusting. It’s dishonest. And dare I say it’s evil. God will hopefully judge this harshly if indeed there is an afterlife.

A lot of the people against abortions are living in the poorest states.

 

[djmich]

With Christians it seems that the abortion issue is a convenient way to “hurt the right people (poor and/or non-white)

It must be sad to have this dim of a view of so many of your fellow humans.

 

[Sabertooth]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

This is a great example of conservatism according to Frank Wilhoit- “There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Rich people can still get abortions as they always have and will. Poor people not so much.

Abortions is kind of a perfect storm in the way it truly only impacts poor folks. It keeps the cycle of poverty working because let’s face it, the rich need desperately poor people to man those Walmarts and work those fields. If we don’t have desperate poor, the rich cannot keep making more money by underpaying them grossly.

Another benefit of abortion ban is now those who are stuck with extra kids can be easily identified and judged and dismissed as loose or inmoral women, which frees up the Christian’s to judge and scorn them with glee.

This also helps with the guilt that should accompany denying poor children food and healthcare and housing. Well we can’t go giving those whores free money, they’ll just have more kids and smoke more weed. It would be immoral to enable such awful subhumans.

With Christians it seems that the abortion issue is a convenient way to “hurt the right people (poor and/or non-white) while sidestepping all guilt and “saving the babies.” It’s disgusting. It’s dishonest. And dare I say it’s evil. God will hopefully judge this harshly if indeed there is an afterlife.

A lot of the people against abortions are living in the poorest states.

I agree with that. People vote against their own best interest all the time. How are those billionaire tax cuts working out?

 

[Shula-holic]

there is opportunity for everyone

some people have more opportunity because of rules/laws/special programs etc that gives them opportunity based on DNA/ancestory, skin color, sexual choices etc etc

but unlike many countries you are right, at its core, we all have opportunity in the USA as legal US citizens to go as far as we want to go with hard work and effort and good choices. Thanks to the SC, in many states unborn babies now have those chances too

Many of those fetuses will be born to parents often single mothers who don't want them and can't afford to raise a child, and whose opportunity in many cases will be severely limited.

This is a great example of conservatism according to Frank Wilhoit- “There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Rich people can still get abortions as they always have and will. Poor people not so much.

Abortions is kind of a perfect storm in the way it truly only impacts poor folks. It keeps the cycle of poverty working because let’s face it, the rich need desperately poor people to man those Walmarts and work those fields. If we don’t have desperate poor, the rich cannot keep making more money by underpaying them grossly.

Another benefit of abortion ban is now those who are stuck with extra kids can be easily identified and judged and dismissed as loose or inmoral women, which frees up the Christian’s to judge and scorn them with glee.

This also helps with the guilt that should accompany denying poor children food and healthcare and housing. Well we can’t go giving those whores free money, they’ll just have more kids and smoke more weed. It would be immoral to enable such awful subhumans.

With Christians it seems that the abortion issue is a convenient way to “hurt the right people (poor and/or non-white) while sidestepping all guilt and “saving the babies.” It’s disgusting. It’s dishonest. And dare I say it’s evil. God will hopefully judge this harshly if indeed there is an afterlife.

A lot of the people against abortions are living in the poorest states.

I agree with that. People vote against their own best interest all the time. How are those billionaire tax cuts working out?

As someone from a poorer state, it's my personal all time favorite bill