Universal Basic Income; 'bout time or batshit crazy?

[Rob Roy]

That shit doesn't make sense. Growing plants doesn't pollute the environment. And he probably grows indoors to keep off the radar.

That might depend on how the electricity used to grow the plants is generated.


Here...for your amusement.

 

[Olive Drab Green]

That might depend on how the electricity used to grow the plants is generated.


Here...for your amusement.

View attachment 3968383

 

[UncleBuck]

thats cool man at least I got some chicken.

jesus, "dindu nuffin" and "purple lips" was enough you shithead.

 

[Rob Roy]

View attachment 3968386

 

[twostrokenut]

I dunno about you, but our energy is nuclear, and my lights use as much as lighting a room. It probably uses less electricity than you use in a single room in your trailer.

i miss those nuclear rates I spend a great deal of time talking to other Californians about the extreme benefits of nuclear to the pocketbooks of the poor and middle class.

 

[esh dov ets]

Children don't need the full amount, perhaps 25% until they're 16?

500 bucks per child per month would cover all their routine costs.

ok . that' 73.8 million people less than 318.8 million. 245,000,000 to give them each $1000 is 245,000,000,000
what i am purposing costs 38,731,440,000 and taxes the top 1-2% of wealth less than 1% of there income.

 

[twostrokenut]

how about the poor and middle class right to keep every cent they make? it's no basic income but it actually exists in reality and its a great way to put money in their pocket RIGHT NOW that will result in their vote in how to deal with this 1% pack waaaaaay more punch...to the tune of whatever the tax code states.

since we know all these 1% ers provide "99%" of all the goods and services we receive then yes, let's tax their income in the spirit of equity but let's leave wages be in the name of equality.

fair compromise it seems like everyone would win there except the war machine.

 

[esh dov ets]

That shit doesn't make sense. Growing plants doesn't pollute the environment. And he probably grows indoors to keep off the radar.

sadly indoor esp. hydro grows use minerals from strip mines and fossil fuel production. peat sourcing destroys bogs, guano destroys caves and bat and bird habitats , rock wool is messy for the environment. it is tough to stay responsible. out dor grows have a history of polluting or wrecking local ecosystems sometimes. it is up to us to keep green green.

nice edit.

i built the greenhouse then never used it. might throw some in there this fall but probably not. outdoor weed, even light dep, just sucks.

outdoor is bomb. unless you are smoking shwag.

 

[esh dov ets]

 

[esh dov ets]

Your statistic of 30k being just over 50% of the total population is off because that's not how it is calculated or what the statistic means. Otherwise, we are in complete agreement.

If you make more than $30,000, you earn more than 53.2% of Americans
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/income-inequality-crisis_n_4221012.html

 

[Rob Roy]

 

[esh dov ets]

 

[Lucky Luke]

Coal is dirty. Nucler has a storage problem and is dangerous.

We use Hydro and some wind farms to help supply the mainland states. Green Battery of the Nation idea. We just had one approved. All this new green tech is great for jobs. @ttystikk http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-27/granville-harbour-wind-farm-a-step-closer/8655952 You mentioned something about wanting to get into that type of industry.

 

[ttystikk]

If you make more than $30,000, you earn more than 53.2% of Americans
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/income-inequality-crisis_n_4221012.html

That article is almost 4 years old. The current numbers are a bit better but not any kind of big jump.

The last numbers I saw for the ultra rich were that the top one in 10,000 earned an average of $27 million annually- which of course means that even most of them are making less while some of them are making much, much more...

Labor participation rate is 62.7%
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Total labor force, about 160,000,000
http://www.dlt.ri.gov/lmi/laus/us/usadj.htm

Unemployment rate 4.3%, same page

So one in ten thousand would be 16,000 earners out of a total population of about 318,000,000.

 

[ttystikk]

Coal is dirty. Nucler has a storage problem and is dangerous.

We use Hydro and some wind farms to help supply the mainland states. Green Battery of the Nation idea. We just had one approved. All this new green tech is great for jobs. @ttystikk http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-27/granville-harbour-wind-farm-a-step-closer/8655952 You mentioned something about wanting to get into that type of industry.

Interesting stuff! Thanks

 

[esh dov ets]

That article is almost 4 years old. The current numbers are a bit better but not any kind of big jump.

The last numbers I saw for the ultra rich were that the top one in 10,000 earned an average of $27 million annually- which of course means that even most of them are making less while some of them are making much, much more...

Labor participation rate is 62.7%
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Total labor force, about 160,000,000
http://www.dlt.ri.gov/lmi/laus/us/usadj.htm

Unemployment rate 4.3%, same page

So one in ten thousand would be 16,000 earners out of a total population of about 318,000,000.

i was saying 159 million workers you are saying 160 million. no big difference.
500,000 times 12 = 6 million. the top 2% of the total pop of over 318 million is 6,360,000 earners ; taxed at $1000 amo , thats 76,320,000,000 a year, which more than covers the 38,731,440,000 needed to give 1000 a mo. to those under 30,000 a year . those over 27 million are included in the top 2%

 

[esh dov ets]

how about the poor and middle class right to keep every cent they make? it's no basic income but it actually exists in reality and its a great way to put money in their pocket RIGHT NOW that will result in their vote in how to deal with this 1% pack waaaaaay more punch...to the tune of whatever the tax code states.

since we know all these 1% ers provide "99%" of all the goods and services we receive then yes, let's tax their income in the spirit of equity but let's leave wages be in the name of equality.

fair compromise it seems like everyone would win there except the war machine.

yeah but where did you get that the top 1% provide 99% of goods?

 

[ttystikk]

yeah but where did you get that the top 1% provide 99% of goods?

He's wrong. The top 1% own 90% of all assets, but that certainly does not equate to production.

 

[ttystikk]

i was saying 159 million workers you are saying 160 million. no big difference.
500,000 times 12 = 6 million. the top 2% of the total pop of over 318 million is 6,360,000 earners ; taxed at $1000 amo , thats 76,320,000,000 a year, which more than covers the 38,731,440,000 needed to give 1000 a mo. to those under 30,000 a year . those over 27 million are included in the top 2%

I'm trying to figure out what you're doing here. Can you explain?

 

[twostrokenut]

means of production are not assets? an asset is an economic resource.