Would you support universal basic income if it meant eliminating all other social safety net progs?

[ttystikk]

I don't get, how you think you can pontificate anything to me? Your beliefs are based on conjecture, hearsay and secondary evidences. For credibility, you look to whom consensus says to give credibility to. Study some history tty, who were the Moors?

Derp.

Ever heard of Neil deGrasse Tyson? My favorite quote of his is, 'The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.'

My understanding of how the physical world works leads to new and useful technology. Yours leads to navel gazing while you circle the drain.

 

[reddan1981]

Derp.

Ever heard of Neil deGrasse Tyson? My favorite quote of his is, 'The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.'

My understanding of how the physical world works leads to new and useful technology. Yours leads to navel gazing while you circle the drain.

Derp? Neil is a fucking turkey, ha ha ha get the fuck out of here.
Show me (which you are incapable of)
# rocket propulsion in a vacuum in test conditions
# an experiment that shows curvature @ 8 inches per mile squared
# proof of precessional wobble
# dark matter

Go science!

 

[reddan1981]

"The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific 'truth'". -Richard Feynman

 

[Nugachino]

Basic income. Yeah. I kinda do think it should be supplied. But only if you apply for it first. And meet some basic none discriminatory criteria.

 

[ttystikk]

Basic income. Yeah. I kinda do think it should be supplied. But only if you apply for it first. And meet some basic none discriminatory criteria.

Care to elaborate?

 

[Nugachino]

If you mean basic income like welfare. Then yes. I do think there should be something for those that haven't got a means to support themselves.

To be on it. You must be trying to find work. And supplying proof of a reasonable minimum number of searches. You must also have the appropriate paperwork to be staying and working in the country of job going. Drug tests could be applied at random. Proof of ice, or meth or other hard substances are dismissals. And repplication will only pass once an elapsed period of time or passed drug test occurs.

Minimum income should be enough to cover: rent of a suitable property, pay the at least some of the bills. And cover the cost of food for the time between each payment.


I don't know. Stuff like that. I don't think that's all too unfair.

 

[whitebb2727]

If you mean basic income like welfare. Then yes. I do think there should be something for those that haven't got a means to support themselves.

To be on it. You must be trying to find work. And supplying proof of a reasonable minimum number of searches. You must also have the appropriate paperwork to be staying and working in the country of job going. Drug tests could be applied at random. Proof of ice, or meth or other hard substances are dismissals. And repplication will only pass once an elapsed period of time or passed drug test occurs.

Minimum income should be enough to cover: rent of a suitable property, pay the at least some of the bills. And cover the cost of food for the time between each payment.


I don't know. Stuff like that. I don't think that's all too unfair.

Screw those horrible addicts.

You ever think that maybe if they got some help in the form of income and treatment they would be better off?

 

[reddan1981]

If you mean basic income like welfare. Then yes. I do think there should be something for those that haven't got a means to support themselves.

To be on it. You must be trying to find work. And supplying proof of a reasonable minimum number of searches. You must also have the appropriate paperwork to be staying and working in the country of job going. Drug tests could be applied at random. Proof of ice, or meth or other hard substances are dismissals. And repplication will only pass once an elapsed period of time or passed drug test occurs.

Minimum income should be enough to cover: rent of a suitable property, pay the at least some of the bills. And cover the cost of food for the time between each payment.


I don't know. Stuff like that. I don't think that's all too unfair.

What happens to persons that don't fit the mandatory requirements?
The cycle will continue.

 

[Grandpapy]

Wall Street numbers thur the roof yet this question is offered by the OP.

Sounds more like a Corporate questionnaire.

 

[Nugachino]

Screw those horrible addicts.

You ever think that maybe if they got some help in the form of income and treatment they would be better off?

I take no offense. But, half the year these days I'm actually unemployed. And have to resort to this style of living to get through to the next job I get. Which thus far has only been this one labor hire job over two 6 month seasons.

This town has very few jobs. And those that do come up. Go rather quickly.
I've even taken certification courses to try gain employment. But still nothing.

I've got machine tickets for bobcats, front end loaders, back hoes, 20t rollers, small tip trucks. A 10t forklift licence. And explosive tools card.

I have cert two in retail. And cert two in land conservation and preservation.
I've worked foundries for years. Worked vineyards for half as long. I did work experience as a tour train kitchen hand.

I get very few job offers. I'm not being given the opportunity to gain full time employment. No one seems to be hiring when I ask around.

 

[CriticalCheeze]

I don't get, how you think you can pontificate anything to me? Your beliefs are based on conjecture, hearsay and secondary evidences. For credibility, you look to whom consensus says to give credibility to. Study some history tty, who were the Moors?

Can you get anymore retarded or are you past that point?

 

[ttystikk]

If you mean basic income like welfare. Then yes. I do think there should be something for those that haven't got a means to support themselves.

To be on it. You must be trying to find work. And supplying proof of a reasonable minimum number of searches. You must also have the appropriate paperwork to be staying and working in the country of job going. Drug tests could be applied at random. Proof of ice, or meth or other hard substances are dismissals. And repplication will only pass once an elapsed period of time or passed drug test occurs.

Minimum income should be enough to cover: rent of a suitable property, pay the at least some of the bills. And cover the cost of food for the time between each payment.


I don't know. Stuff like that. I don't think that's all too unfair.

I think you've missed the point entirely.

 

[Fogdog]

I take no offense. But, half the year these days I'm actually unemployed. And have to resort to this style of living to get through to the next job I get. Which thus far has only been this one labor hire job over two 6 month seasons.

This town has very few jobs. And those that do come up. Go rather quickly.
I've even taken certification courses to try gain employment. But still nothing.

I've got machine tickets for bobcats, front end loaders, back hoes, 20t rollers, small tip trucks. A 10t forklift licence. And explosive tools card.

I have cert two in retail. And cert two in land conservation and preservation.
I've worked foundries for years. Worked vineyards for half as long. I did work experience as a tour train kitchen hand.

I get very few job offers. I'm not being given the opportunity to gain full time employment. No one seems to be hiring when I ask around.

In days past, people moved to where they can find work. Now rural whites expect work to find them. Why do you think this has happened?

 

[reddan1981]

Can you get anymore retarded or are you past that point?

 

[ttystikk]

In days past, people moved to where they can find work. Now rural whites expect work to find them. Why do you think this has happened?

It's part of their conservative/religious political ideology: 'wishful thinking'.

 

[londonfog]

I take no offense. But, half the year these days I'm actually unemployed. And have to resort to this style of living to get through to the next job I get. Which thus far has only been this one labor hire job over two 6 month seasons.

This town has very few jobs. And those that do come up. Go rather quickly.
I've even taken certification courses to try gain employment. But still nothing.

I've got machine tickets for bobcats, front end loaders, back hoes, 20t rollers, small tip trucks. A 10t forklift licence. And explosive tools card.

I have cert two in retail. And cert two in land conservation and preservation.
I've worked foundries for years. Worked vineyards for half as long. I did work experience as a tour train kitchen hand.

I get very few job offers. I'm not being given the opportunity to gain full time employment. No one seems to be hiring when I ask around.

move closer to a bigger city thats doing a lot of construction. You can even temporarily move for 6 months of the year.
and what certs do you have to have for retail ?

 

[Fogdog]

It's part of their conservative/religious political ideology: 'wishful thinking'.

I'm curious what his answer will be. Assuming he has an answer.

I don't know if it's a good thing that people should have to uproot and move away from friends and family whenever economic trends change. I'm beginning to think it's all for the convenience of the 1%. One can expect support from family when finances are tight. Grandparents caring for kids while parents work, for instance. Moving away from that is risky when one is on the economic edge, so I can see why there is reluctance to move away. On the other hand, anybody who is absolutely dependent on keeping a job because otherwise they would be out of work and alone in the city is exactly the kind of power that the wealthy want to have over the work force.

Another thing is that the cities aren't exactly brimming with jobs these days either. That, and cities are already strained to provide services to the people already there. More people makes for more expanded urban infrastructure. Meanwhile rural areas lose population, which means less for everybody left behind. If trends continue, the rural country will be pretty much empty while an urban jungle develops in a few states.

So, why not develop an economy that provides for a decent living in rural america? A part of the answer would be universal basic income. Another answer would be breaking up factory farms into smaller farms to accommodate family farming. Another would be expansion of high speed data lines to every home and business in the country. Not saying I have an answer but am saying that our current system isn't working and the trends leave everybody worse off if they continue.

 

[ttystikk]

I'm curious what his answer will be. Assuming he has an answer.

I don't know if it's a good thing that people should have to uproot and move away from friends and family whenever economic trends change. I'm beginning to think it's all for the convenience of the 1%. One can expect support from family when finances are tight. Grandparents caring for kids while parents work, for instance. Moving away from that is risky when one is on the economic edge, so I can see why there is reluctance to move away. On the other hand, anybody who is absolutely dependent on keeping a job because otherwise they would be out of work and alone in the city is exactly the kind of power that the wealthy want to have over the work force.

Another thing is that the cities aren't exactly brimming with jobs these days either. That, and cities are already strained to provide services to the people already there. More people makes for more expanded urban infrastructure. Meanwhile rural areas lose population, which means less for everybody left behind. If trends continue, the rural country will be pretty much empty while an urban jungle develops in a few states.

So, why not develop an economy that provides for a decent living in rural america? A part of the answer would be universal basic income. Another answer would be breaking up factory farms into smaller farms to accommodate family farming. Another would be expansion of high speed data lines to every home and business in the country. Not saying I have an answer but am saying that our current system isn't working and the trends leave everybody worse off if they continue.

You raise many very good points.

For example, depopulating the countryside is a trend that's run its course. We need people in rural areas, and we need to ensure they have modern services and infrastructure, including but not limited to high speed internet access. Then one's education and ability to contribute to the knowledge economy is no longer tied to services only available in urban areas.

Coming trends of decentralized power production and distribution, transportation and food availability all point to a resurgence of exurban spaces as the desirable places to be. And much of the infrastructure is already in place; roads, plumbing and power and they're underutilized due to the century of urban migration we've just experienced.

I don't care how much I'm worth; I'll NEVER want to live in downtown LA or on Park Avenue in Manhattan. If I'm ever fortunate enough to break out of the middle class, I'll want to live where there's fresh air, elbow room and local produce.

You've made another excellent point about breaking up families for the convenience of wealthy corporations. The reason why so many cultures around the world revere and encourage multigenerational housing is precisely because of the inherent family support system. Young people can take care of older people, while older folks can provide financial support, experience and wisdom- and childcare. Shredding that powerful family unit works to the advantage of no one but the corporation who seeks power over their workers by making them helpless and totally dependent.

A universal basic income would support such a future, and it would be better for all involved.

 

[esh dov ets]

A UBI of $1,500/month ($18,000/year) to every American citizen, regardless of age, from birth to death & the elimination of all other social safety net programs

Support/oppose? Why?

Support, WITH other social security because 1,500 is not enough to live on with out a job or other help. consider rent, food, utilities, social spending, hobbies, family, basic things that make you not tragically poor.

 

[esh dov ets]

How does that apply to whether or not you would continue to work if you received a $1,500/month UBI?

you would still need things and want things. and people still want to contribute to society and go out and be part of a social net work.