Why universal basic income is gaining support, critics or The destruction of our Republic

Posted by Mitch 1 year, 10 months ago to Politics
57 comments | Share | Flag

It's back again...

"He figures the plan would cost about $1.75 trillion a year. Ending welfare programs would save about a third of that. Another third could come from ending the tax deduction for mortgage interest and other write-offs. The remaining third could come from new sources such as a tax on carbon emissions or financial transactions."

1/3 through "ending welfare programs" - will never happen but okay...
1/3 through "ending the tax deduction for mortgage interest and other write-offs" - So they are going to take my mortgage interest deduction away and give it to someone else.
1/3 through more taxes - robbing Peter to pay Paul again

Also, this is paper napkin figures, government will double the cost with half the production.
SOURCE URL: http://www.sfchronicle.com/aboutsfgate/article/Why-universal-basic-income-is-gaining-support-11290211.php


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Eyecu2 1 year, 10 months ago
    There certainly should be a basic universal income and it should be $0.00 annually plus anything you can EARN ON YOUR OWN! Sorry for the shouting but they never seem to get it and I am sick of their schemes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Joy1inchrist 1 year, 10 months ago
      "There certainly should be a basic universal income and it should be $0.00 annually plus anything you can EARN ON YOUR OWN!" ... Perfect answer - absolutely perfect and succinct!!! 0.00 also happens to be the % our income should be taxed ... and the percentage that the government owns my life ... EXACTLY 0.00%
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by wiggys 1 year, 10 months ago
      Eyecu2 we are quickly working towards that universal income as you put of $0.00. It is just a matter of time. You know of course those who reside in Washington D.C. know not what they do. I am hoping that the disease that McCain has is catching!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  gharkness 1 year, 10 months ago
    As a person who loves life and loves living, sometimes when I read stuff like this I am glad I can't live forever. I just hope I don't live long enough for this stupid idea to come to pass, and I cry for my (uber-productive) kids. They've worked so hard - for what! - just to have it all snatched away.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
      Precisely, this will be the legacy left for our children… We let this fester, we let them teach an alternate history, we let them control the news media, we let them steal our elections. We only have ourselves to blame.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 1 year, 10 months ago
    The plan to continue stealing from productive people and giving it away is somehow different with a new name and a new organizational chart on distribution? It still requires that someone is productive in order to steal from them! The problem with giving someone a 'cushion' so they aren't afraid to try new things encourages people to be lazy, inefficient and carless in cobbling together new ideas for production. Elon Musk is a large recipient of tax fraud (pretending to make an industry viable) getting subsidies from taxpayers for his 'green' ideas for new roofing and electric cars that would not be viable products if the consumer had to pay the full price of production. I like what the economist Walter E. Williams once said; 'Starvation is a powerful motivator.'
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 10 months ago
    Mortgage interest deduction is to benefit the banking cartel, not you. Not likely to be changed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
      True, to the point that it encourages people to purchase a home on credit. I’d love the mortgage interest deduction to go away but it would have to happen in conjunction with tax cuts that offset the losses. The government shouldn’t be in the business of promoting one activity over the other, that is for dictatorships.

      The UBI discussion here is to use that to pay for a handout… I understand that I would be getting “some” of this back. My problem is that it’s not the governments money to give to me in the first place, it’s my own money. They take it with a tax and then “decide” if you should get more than/the same as/less then you paid in based on a merit that isn’t a merit I consider a virtue. The beginning of serfdom…
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by craigerb 1 year, 10 months ago
      All interest income is taxed, so ALL interest payments should be deducted.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 10 months ago
        Neither interest income nor interest expense should have any tax effects. It's just a way to manipulate people to take on debt and to punish saving - the opposite of a rational approach.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by craigerb 1 year, 10 months ago
          No, taxing income raises govt revenue.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
            Taxing income does not necessarily produce more government revenue. After a point of taxation, producers choose to not produce to avoid additional taxes; ether through moving the income to future dates or simply not producing it in the first place.

            You’ll find that the government can collect more in tax revenue by reducing the tax rates and increasing the “velocity” of the money. Each time the dollar changes hands, the government gets a piece of it.

            See the Laffer curve - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
              " After a point of taxation, producers choose to not produce to avoid additional taxes"
              This never made sense to me except in cases where taxes are nearly 100% or there's a "cliff" where a change in earnings affects taxes on all income.

              Let's say the Fed gov't taxes 30% of GDP now, and we reduce it to 25%. GDP would have to increase 20% to cause revenue to stay constant. GDP growth will stay in the 3% range. Maybe by lowering taxes, leaving business alone, and providing a safe place to do business, the gov't can make growth 5% or more. After years of compounding, that's huge. So eventually gov't spending, and spending on everything, could be way higher. But it's a dream that you can somehow cut taxes and not increase borrowing or decrease gov't spending. Gov't spending must decrease.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 10 months ago
                If I have enough for all my needs and wants, I choose to strike instead of supporting those who want to destroy the things that I value. Production taxation is the primary method the state uses to destroy the free market and individual liberty. I do not consent.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
        Disagree, all interest payments are not deductible, you can’t deduct the interest paid on a car load or a credit card. All income shouldn’t be taxed ether… Taxing income discourages production, taxing consumption should have been used to fund the government.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  pixelate 1 year, 10 months ago
    As I have posted, under my own name, on YouTube comments regarding UBI "An individual is no more entitled to a basic income as an individual is entitled to a blo*job." I go on with more explanation, but that is the gist of it. Only people with unbridled conceit (and no self-awareness) would endorse such absolute madness.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 1 year, 10 months ago
    It's fine for me! I'm retired. I get S.S. Plus, I've got savings. This could probably boost me up to the next former income tax deduction.What a country! Oh damn, I forgot. I got children. I also got grandchildren. And one (so far) great grand child. They are the ones who will have to pay for this when it all collapses in a few years. Meanwhile, they'll have to repair the economic shambles left in its wake.Oh well, screw 'em. What have they ever done for Me? (LOL)
    Wait -- change that LOL to chuckle. Wait -- change that chuckle to a grim smile. Wait -- change that.....Oh, hell just forget it. It's just too stupid to contemplate.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbunce 1 year, 10 months ago
    Criminal organizations have used this forever... it is called protection money... and probably in our future unless you are willing to have a government gunning down large numbers of people in the streets. If they use MMT principles will not need to tax anyone to pay for it. The rest of us can use cryptocurrencies.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 1 year, 10 months ago
    MITCH,
    You are a day late and a dollar short; the republic has been destroyed.
    Just keep in mind that we are seeing, experiencing the ALTRUISTIC movement taking over the country. and it has been in the works for over 100 years.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  puzzlelady 1 year, 10 months ago
      They can call it altruism and make people think it means being good to others rather than exploitive. What it means in reality is that those that can be conned into depriving themselves become fodder for the unconscionable vampires and cannibals who look to exploit (pseudo-legally) anyone softhearted enough to go along. And the controllable not only go along but pay lip service to and promote redistribution (read: take from some and give to others) from their compatriots, sanctimoniously steering benefits to themselves as well. They are the ticks in the hides of humanity.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Maritimus 1 year, 10 months ago
        I like that image of ticks, Puzzlelady. They do suck the lifeblood from producer. In reality, as has been demonstrated throughout the 20th century, there is no equality. There two classes in those societies. Party members on top and all the rest below. The party consist of the elite on top and the rest are those who delude themselves that some day they will join the elite and in the meantime do the dirty work for the elite. Just read We the Living.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by fosterj717 1 year, 10 months ago
    This is about one of the most stupid things I have ever heard! This even takes the socialized world of "Atlas Shrugged" to the edge making Rand's view of the future lame and weak by comparison! Pushing this is pushing the nation towards fully attaining the Fabian Society's wildest dreams of a Communist take-over (of course through incremental socialism as was the plan).

    As for the government doubling the costs at half the production, even that is wildly over-optimistic! Just another "pipe dream" for the terminally stupid and/or naive!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 1 year, 10 months ago
    These Progressive Socialist Nazi Dim's are losing their grip on reality. There is some much waste in the government already that has to be cleaned up first. Universal Income could bankrupt the US, you would have to have an exact census of all the people at or below the poverty line plus those millions who have completely dropped out of the work force because they were unable to find a job. Any program like UBI is ripe for bureaucratic corruption. The DC swamp would have severely drained and forcibly turn over to reveal the rot that's underneath. Once that's done
    then I guess all those sub-humans would have to go on UBI also.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 1 year, 10 months ago
    I noticed the passage: "...the federal government should provide a job with benefits to anyone who wants one and can’t get one. “A job guarantee could simultaneously lower un- and underemployment..."

    If you've ever read "The Gulag Archipelago" you'll recall that was Stalin's plan. It didn't work out well for millions of unemployed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 1 year, 10 months ago
    Me dino is waiting to see a grinning bright-eyed motivational speaker burn a copy of The Constitution before a roaring applause.
    This would be called "for the universal better good."
    Me age 70 but I think I've ample time to see something like that.
    After all, I started to see the flag being burned back during the 60s.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -6
    Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
    There will be more calls for this in the future because they are correct that technology is causing higher returns on investment and lower returns on labor. The solution is not more gov't spending.

    I agree with your analysis about the thirds. I would support replacing Welfare programs with some sort of direct payments if it meant the same money going to the needy but with less administrative overhead and no new spending.

    The other two thirds are, as you say, veiled tax increases. I actually agree with things like mortgage interest not being a deduction. I would rather them lower the rate and eliminate deductions meant to subsidize certain spending, e.g. spending on mortgage interest. I agree with a tax on carbon emissions because the evidence shows those emissions will cost other people money in the future. They can do that in a revenue neutral way, reducing taxes on money made through work and investing, which unlike burning stuff do not threaten the environment.

    I am concerned, though, that something like this will be passed. People will show some numbers about how many hours you have to work to pay for a basket of groceries 50 years ago and now. They'll show you many baskets of groceries worth of wealth you'd need to have to earn enough feed a family 50 years ago and now. It will make socialism look more appealing. 50 years is a blip of time, but it feels long compared to our lifetimes.

    I can see a Trump-like figure and a Sanders-like figure joining forces in support of this. Hopefully I'm just in a cynical mood.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 1 year, 10 months ago
      Some people would ‘need’ more than others tho. It would degenerate into a huge application process to determine this need. As the totality of the needs rises, prices will go up as they have in medical care and college costs, and then the needed amount increases again
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
        That's my concern: the bureaucracy it was supposed to replace would come back, but the new entitlement would not go away.

        When you say a "huge application process to determine need," I think of the socialist system at the motor plan in AS. It gives a good description of to whom people would submit their application.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
      The automation revolution is going to be disruptive but don’t be ignorant and believe that UBI is a solution. The people promoting UBI are not your friend, this isn’t the utopian wonderland your looking for, this is a dystopian disaster where we will have classes of people or stratification of humanity.

      The only way forward is to retrain people for the maintenance, design, coding and manufacturing of the automation. Right now, I’m speaking about the digital menus used to replace the waiter, the machine in Mc Donald’s that replaces the french-fry cook or the automated car that replaces the taxi driver. This the first wave of automation already beginning. The second wave occurs when these businesses reap massive rewards for being the first and everyone else plays catchup. Before here is when the next Microsoft, IBM or Apple is born for automation by publishing API, OS and hardware for automation.

      Here, where automation takes hold is where I see a massive disruption in the economy while everything readjusts. It has to, without UBI. This bullshit about machines building machines with the artificial intelligence to rival humans is way, way off…
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 year, 10 months ago
        I think that the automation threshold is when a robot is built that can clean hotel rooms. While a mundane, low-paying task, it involves a number of tasks that are currently beyond our state of the art.

        Once this threshold is reached, then it will capable of replacing the jobs done by 95% of humanity.

        Up til now automation has replaced repetitive, well-defined tasks. When it can replace ill-defined ones then what?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
          Purpose built machines are going to be the initial in road into this. If I sell you an automated vacuum machine that operates 24/7 without breaks, that’s just fewer employees the business needs to hire. Next is automated launder… a machine to change the sheets and make the bed is doable now. That also reduces the employee count.

          No need for general purpose machines as that is a complex endeavor with little profit on the return building the AI and mechanics. A dumb machine is quicker and cheaper.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 year, 10 months ago
            But people are working on them just the same. And the same was once said about control systems. It was much easier to design a control system for a purpose than to build in a whole computer. But then the whole computer became standardized into a chip and it was much easier to just use the chip and program it than build specialized circuitry.

            If you can build one device that sells into all those markets, even it is a bit more expensive it will be preferable to designing, building and supporting separate product lines. Plus you will be much more agile in meeting emerging needs.

            Once it becomes practical, it will be inevitable.

            The key application is home assistance. With nursing homes exceeding 75K a year and an aging population there is an amazing need and budget for a general purpose home assistant. And if it can do that job, it can do pretty much anything.

            Demographics says we're in trouble if we don't do this!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
              "The key application is home assistance. "
              I agree the technology will disrupt nursing homes and assisted living.
              Also, when my kids grouse about doing housework, I tell them one day the task will be done by a robot and doing it yourself will seem as primitive like having to out in the cold to use the outhouse.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
          "Once this threshold is reached, then it will capable of replacing the jobs done by 95% of humanity. Up til now automation has replaced repetitive, well-defined tasks. When it can replace ill-defined ones then what?"
          I don't know exactly, but it will be as big a chance as the industrial revolution eliminated most jobs. I think it will increase production by the same amount, creating a world of plenty unrecognizable to people from before the revolution.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • -1
        Posted by craigerb 1 year, 10 months ago
        I prefer guaranteed jobs rather than guaranteed income. If jobs disappear, then job-sharing (20 hrs/wk each) should be the norm.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
          You get no guarantees in life, who are you to say that I offer a stranger a guaranteed job or income? The cost of the guarantee is going to come out of my pocket.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by craigerb 1 year, 10 months ago
            Huh?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
              By the way, job-sharing is a liberal way of saying part-time work. No such thing in my opinion. How would this work? Would the government tell me to produce less? What would stop me from working two or more 20 hours per week jobs? Hiring two people to do the work of one is just twice the headaches, excluding the Obama-care mandates which should be going away shortly.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 year, 10 months ago
              Really? What are you having a hard time understanding?

              Are you saying that you would prefer to subsidize guaranteed jobs over guaranteed income? If so, nether would work. If the job is guaranteed, the employee would not have a motive to keep the job. It would be glorified adult-daycare. The bureaucracy of this program would cost more than simply just handing the people our money.

              Or are you saying you would prefer to receive a guaranteed job over guaranteed income? If this is your true intent, I truly feel sorry for you and wish you all the best. You’re not in control of your own status and future status but look to other to provide for you. Very said, I hope for you that this isn’t what you intended?

              By the way, “Huh” isn’t a word…
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 year, 10 months ago
          So, wages then have to be high enough for someone to live on with 20 hours a week. Your 'solution' is to make labor twice as expensive, which will add even more pressure to automate.

          Unless the government will 'guarantee jobs' by outlawing automation.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by craigerb 1 year, 10 months ago
            Huh?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 year, 10 months ago
              If we job share and 20 hours a week is the norm, then you must make enough in 20 hours to live on. That would mean that you would make about twice what you do now -- or rather the employer would have to pay twice as much for the same work.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
                "If we job share and 20 hours a week is the norm..."
                Your comment makes sense, but it also accepts craigerb's premise that jobs are something that can be rationed. Jobs are just people serving one another for money. To get things done, we need to serve one another, either willingly in mutually-agreed trade or under the whip or some other sort of coercion.

                Suppose a kid sees I'm letting my grass grow long and offers to mow it. I might use that time to find more clients of my own or to get rest/energy hanging out with my family or just goofing off on a website like now. That might cause me to hire more people, ship more overnight packages, send more bins of electronic junk to my neighbor who sells them on e-bay and keeps half the money. All these people are serving one another. It doesn't make sense to share these precious jobs. There are as many jobs as people can find ways to serve one another.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • -2
        Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 10 months ago
        I agree with all of this wholeheartedly.

        "The only way forward is to retrain people for the maintenance, design, coding and manufacturing of the automation"
        I agree completely, but when we put it like that it is sounds kind of dour. It actually means we have amazing new tools that don't require huge upfront investment to use. It's actually staggering to think of all the prosperity people will create with those tools.

        "The people promoting UBI are not your friend"
        Yes. No kidding. The only part I said I agreed to is to the extent it replaces programs run by bureaucrats with a simpler program that just hands people cash. I am skeptical of that, though, because it could grow and become a third rail entitlement, and there's no guarantee more gov't spending wouldn't come back.

        My point is all that stuff you said is very good fodder for sophistry showing that times are so unusual that socialism is the answer. That's why I said when I'm feeling cynical I imagine a Trump supporters and Sanders supporters joining forces under the banner of that sophistry.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo