The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Carl on April 26, 2016, 05:52:32 AM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027778287
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:51 PM
Star Member applegrove (70,677 posts)
All of the problems Universal Basic Income can solve that have nothing to do with unemployment
All of the problems Universal Basic Income can solve that have nothing to do with unemployment
by Olivia Goldhill a Quartz
http://qz.com/667208/all-of-the-problems-universal-basic-income-can-solve-that-have-nothing-to-do-with-unemployment/
"SNIP.............
Others are less convinced that there would be such a sharp drop in working hours, but nevertheless believe that UBI would reduce the working week. Currently, most people can’t afford to leave a job without worrying about being destitute, points out Jason Murphy, assistant professor of philosophy at Elms College in Massachusetts, who serves on the US Basic Income Guarantee Network Committee. “Having UBI means more negotiating power all around,†he says in an interview.
As well as increasing leisure time, working less could be a massive step towards reducing the pace of climate change. Bregman points to studies suggesting that working less would half the amount of CO2 (pdf) emitted this century. After all, countries with shorter working weeks have smaller environmental footprints (pdf).
“It’s pretty obvious why,†says Bregman in an interview. “We’re using most of our wealth and increased productivity in the form of more consumption.†We work more to spend more—on travel, cars, trips to the mall, exotic food, and many other products that harm the environment.
Murphy adds that more employees will have the negotiating power to insist on a job closer to their home. “A lot of carbon generation comes from commuting to work,†he says.
............SNIP"
So much idiocy.
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 07:53 PM
Hydra (14,063 posts)
1. I'm advocating hard for this idea
And a lot of people are scared of it- they're afraid someone else will have it easier than them, or that the sacredness of work is at stake.
Things are still moving in various places in the world- just like legalization, it's going to take places that implement it and not having the world end when they do.
You mean because you freaks all talk about dropping out of life in a dope filled haze?
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 08:00 PM
roamer65 (8,697 posts)
2. As long as the middle class doesn't have to bear the tax burden.
It should come from significantly increased taxed on the wealthy.
Oh,so you admit that it will cost somebody and that better better not be you.
Response to roamer65 (Reply #2)
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 08:15 PM
Hydra (14,063 posts)
3. We already subsidize the 1% for all the money this would cost
It's just a matter of taking their free toys away. They're just using it to buy our gov't anyway.
FOAD you piece of shit.
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 10:50 PM
erpowers (6,800 posts)
4. Do Not Support That Reason
I do not support Universal Basic Income as a way to get more people to work less. In the past I did not support universal Basic Income, but I am moving closer to supporting the idea. However, I only support it as a way to help people get on their feet.
To start, I think the government should give low income people between the ages of 18-24 $1,000 per month for 4 years. They could use the money to do anything they want, but they would be encouraged to use the money to improve their lives. Hopefully, they would use the money to get some form of a college degree, get some type of skill that would allow them to either get a job, or get a better/higher paying job, and/or buy clothes, or other items that would help them, or allow them to get a job.
If the government wants people to have more time to spend with families, or more time to go to the movies they could just reduce the work week to four days. Either leave the work week at 32 hours, or make people work 10 hours a day.
:retards:
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 10:53 PM
Star Member FLPanhandle (5,883 posts)
5. You would have to control illegal immigration first.
Otherwise the flood of people coming in to take advantage of it would bankrupt the country.
Not a worry since democrats are the party of the new brown person pseudo slavery.
Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #5)
Tue Apr 26, 2016, 01:39 AM
Star Member applegrove (70,677 posts)
7. Illegals don't typically get welfare today so I doubt they would have access
to a basic income plan.
See.
-
I swear to God these mental midgets derive their economic philosophy from a Fortune Cookie.
-
I swear to God these mental midgets derive their economic philosophy from a Fortune Cookie.
Uh, no, I don't think so.
Reading fortune cookies demands literacy.
-
Their fantasy does guarantee employment, for Bernie Sanders' money-shitting unicorn. That little fella is going to be busy.
-
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 10:50 PM
erpowers (6,800 posts)
4.
To start, I think the government should give low income people between the ages of 18-24 $1,000 per month for 4 years. They could use the money to do anything they want, but they would be encouraged to use the money to improve their lives. Hopefully, they would use the money to get some form of a college degree, get some type of skill that would allow them to either get a job, or get a better/higher paying job, and/or buy clothes, or other items that would help them, or allow them to get a job.
The majority would not do any of that and instead would spend the money on useless shit and :stoner:
-
That's so far beyond industrial-grade in its stupidity that it would be military-grade stupidity, but for Libs' and Progs' loathing of the military.
-
That's so far beyond industrial-grade in its stupidity that it would be military-grade stupidity, but for Libs' and Progs' loathing of the military.
How about Unicorn-grade? :whistling:
-
How about Unicorn-grade? :whistling:
That'll work... :II:
-
How about Unicorn-grade? :whistling:
:thumbs: Maybe Rainbow-Colored-Unicorn-grade?
I don't suffer from hyphenitis, I enjoy it!
-
erpowers (6,800 posts)
4. Do Not Support That Reason
In the past I did not support universal Basic Income, but I am moving closer to supporting the idea. However, I only support it as a way to help people get on their feet.
We already have something like that called welfare, DUmbass, but they're NOT getting on their feet; they're breeding generation after generation of the same, lazy-assed, entitlement mentality mental rejects such as yourself.
-
How about Unicorn-grade? :whistling:
:cheersmate:
Consider it stolen.
-
I'm still stuck on the guy in the original article asserting that somehow exotic food causes climate change. So, if I decide to experiment with Thai food tonight, it's going to cause the end of the world? Idiotic moonbat.
-
:cheersmate:
Consider it stolen.
By all means! :-) :yahoo:
-
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #5)Tue Apr 26, 2016, 01:39 AM
Star Member applegrove (70,677 posts)
7. Illegals don't typically get welfare today so I doubt they would have access
to a basic income plan.
Maybe not in Ottawa or other parts of Canada but they do in this country, Wendy.
-
Where are all of the Chavistas on the DUmp?
Venezuela, another "win" for socialism. Electricity availability has been increased from 24 hours per day to 8 hours per day. Also toilet paper availability has been increased from always to once every month.
I anxiously await the inevitable millions of people killed by the benevolent socialist government.
-
Watters was asking what "Bernie's" people want from the government and where the money will come from.
They had a solution; "the money would come from the Treasury where all the money is kept". :stoner: :couch:
:aliens:
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027783812
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 12:46 PM
Star Member hunter (23,976 posts)
Should we give every homeless person a home?
The Canadian city of Medicine Hat recently became the first city to end homelessness thanks to a surprisingly simple idea: giving every person living on the streets a home with no strings attached.
Unlike many other homelessness initiatives, the so-called "Housing First" approach doesn't require homeless people to make steps towards solving other issues like alcoholism, mental health problems or drug addiction before they get accommodation.
--more--
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36092852
The obvious and experimentally verified answer is "YES!"
This is especially true in our 21st century economy where increasing numbers of people are simply unemployable, not because they are addicts, or mentally ill, or disabled, but because the modern hyper-productive and automated economy simply doesn't need them.
People ought to look at guaranteed housing as a safety net for themselves and their loved ones. The range of jobs and careers that could evaporate in an instant is expanding.
But the best part about being human is that the vast majority of us want to move forward, break the real and imaginary chains that bind us, improve our own standard of living, and contribute to the community. Safe secure housing gives us the foundation to do that.
It`s all FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
-
The Homeless Hilton, coming to a neighborhood near you. I'm sure rich, white liberals will be overjoyed to be the first ones to live next door.
-
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Mon Apr 25, 2016, 10:50 PM
erpowers (6,800 posts)
4. Do Not Support That Reason
I do not support Universal Basic Income as a way to get more people to work less. In the past I did not support universal Basic Income, but I am moving closer to supporting the idea. However, I only support it as a way to help people get on their feet.
To start, I think the government should give low income people between the ages of 18-24 $1,000 per month for 4 years. They could use the money to do anything they want, but they would be encouraged to use the money to improve their lives. Hopefully, they would use the money to get some form of a college degree, get some type of skill that would allow them to either get a job, or get a better/higher paying job, and/or buy clothes, or other items that would help them, or allow them to get a job.
If the government wants people to have more time to spend with families, or more time to go to the movies they could just reduce the work week to four days. Either leave the work week at 32 hours, or make people work 10 hours a day.
Weaves, Boobjobs, buttjobs, Kardashian lifestyle is what they would use that money for! How can you be this ignorant?!!
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027783812
Response to HughBeaumont (Reply #1)
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:23 PM
Star Member Hortensis (6,458 posts)
3. Some municipalities here in the U.S. have also been
providing homes to their homeless with some inspiring results. But it's like making water run uphill. It requires constant tending. And mental illness and severe personality disorders are endemic among the homeless. Only some "just need a break," or a series of breaks, and those are the ones who tend to still be stable in the homes over the long term.
As for empty-house idea, are you sure your neighbors wouldn't mind having untreated mentally ill people and destitute and desperate drug addicts moving in?
Btw, it is very likely that, as soon as your local government got the idea that your neighborhood was a good place to dump problems, they'd be delivering convicted molesters, felons, druggies, and others fresh out of jail who have nowhere to go there. Those NIMBY neighborhoods have a way of objecting and, let's face it, they have to go somewhere.
No simple answers.
Response to Hortensis (Reply #3)
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:55 PM
Star Member hunter (23,978 posts)
5. Nobody ever talks about "functional" alcoholics depressing property values.
And I've met ****-loads of them, even in wealthy neighborhoods. Maybe especially in wealthier neighborhoods.
Opiate addicts, mildly supervised, on methadone or in similar treatment, are generally nicer neighbors than some of the affluent weekend raging alcoholic neighbors I've suffered.
The same would be true of most meth abusers too, given some supervision and enough clean and legal amphetamines to keep them stable.
The dream life of every last DUmbfuk.
Stoned out of their mind and living for free.
-
The dream life of every last DUmbfuk.
Stoned out of their mind and living for free.
Can't get dire straits out of my head now
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
-
The Homeless Hilton, coming to a neighborhood near you. I'm sure rich, white liberals will be overjoyed to be the first ones to live next door.
I am sure that we just missed the thread where kpete volunteered :whistling:
-
The former vice-mayor proposed a homeless high-rise downtown. The city council shut him down.
-
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Weaves, Boobjobs, buttjobs, Kardashian lifestyle is what they would use that money for! How can you be this ignorant?!!
You remember the $2000 credit cards given to the New Orleans "Evacuees" that went to Houston right? An audit of those cards showed someone bought a $800 purse with the card and many, many, many of them were completely spent at strip clubs and liquor stores.
Yes, I'm sure $1000 a month would be responsibly spent. Shit, if they got the money on the first, by the 3rd they'd be broke. All they'd be doing is feeding the beast.
Liberals disgust me.
-
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Weaves, Boobjobs, buttjobs, Kardashian lifestyle is what they would use that money for! How can you be this ignorant?!!
Tits and tats.
-
The majority would not do any of that and instead would spend the money on useless shit and :stoner:
I'd spend half of it on booze and hookers and the other half I'd just spend foolishly.
-
I'd spend half of it on booze and hookers and the other half I'd just spend foolishly.
Booze, broads and bikes. Fixed it. Please spend responsibly and waste the rest.
-
I'd spend half of it on booze and hookers and the other half I'd just spend foolishly.
At that age... I would say you had your priorities correct! :cheersmate:
I know I spent a lot of money on booze and babes back in the day... and what was left I spent in the pursuit thereof. :cheersmate: