zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 110,609
- 29,257
- 146
Yay for Oakland....more crack and 40's.
well, let's wait until the data is back.
Yay for Oakland....more crack and 40's.
COMFORT IS THE ENEMY OF SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT!
If someone is giving you money for doing nothing, the chance that you'll aspire to be something greatly diminishes. Unless you naturally crave success, you'll take the easy road. Why? Because your needs are being met. It's very common for people to get the essentials covered and just give up. They never strive for anything greater. They don't have too!
IMO, it's better to have something that motivates you to do better. Relying on company generosity and government subsidies is not the answer! What's going to happen when the money dries up and there is no more to give out? What happens when the government says "opps. we're $50 Trillion is debt. We need to slash public assistance." I'd rather be self dependent than depend on anyone.
Mark my words. One day in the near future when our economy tanks hard, the people who are getting public assistance are going to be screwed.
Basic income, first pass is to set it at $12,000 a year.
The state with the highest total value of welfare benefits was Hawaii, at $49,175. The lowest was Mississippi, at $16,984.
Sounds like all those people sitting around in Oakland will be getting a paycut, and pure benefit from employment instead of the harm it does to their benefits today.
yup.
why go off the deep end flexy?
You linked to a pilot about basic income. Such, by the way, is now also considered in Finland and Switzerland.
YET, you found it as necessary to add w/ your last sentence that "the government must educate those people to be productive citizens.." and also imply that the folks who'd receive basic income (WHICH BY THE WAY WOULD BE EVERYONE, EVEN THE RICH) "doesn't do anything else but watch Netflix all day".
.
Could you fit any more anti-black in this sentence?
They're a private company. Unless they're breaking the law somehow, they only have to answer to their investors for how they spend their money.
You linked to a pilot about basic income. Such, by the way, is now also considered in Finland and Switzerland.
YET, you found it as necessary to add w/ your last sentence that "the government must educate those people to be productive citizens.." and also imply that the folks who'd receive basic income (WHICH BY THE WAY WOULD BE EVERYONE, EVEN THE RICH) "doesn't do anything else but watch Netflix all day".
So, rather than reporting that a pilot about basic income is planned for Oakland, you needed to add some (rather idiotic, if not insulting) opinion.
By the way, if you inform yourself about basic income and why it would be good....you'd also realize that with basic income welfare abuse and leeching off the system becomes obsolete. If EVERYONE has the right to such a lump sum, there is no-one who can (technically) be leeching off the system any more.
um no.
try again alex
People get a lump sum of money ($1k - $2k per month) on a regular basis to cover the cost of rent and food without needing to work for it.
Your short-sightedness is...amazing...
There will ALWAYS be the unemployed. There will ALWAYS be people on welfare.
Abandoning the immense bureaucracy behind this (SS, health insurance, welfare, unemployment etc.) and INSTEAD give the people a basic income TO COVER BASIC ESSENTIALS is very smart. For starters, it gives people an incentive to work since there is no "fear" anymore to lose benefits by taking on work.
COMFORT IS THE ENEMY OF SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT!
If someone is giving you money for doing nothing, the chance that you'll aspire to be something greatly diminishes. Unless you naturally crave success, you'll take the easy road. Why? Because your needs are being met. It's very common for people to get the essentials covered and just give up. They never strive for anything greater. They don't have too!
IMO, it's better to have something that motivates you to do better. Relying on company generosity and government subsidies is not the answer! What's going to happen when the money dries up and there is no more to give out? What happens when the government says "opps. we're $50 Trillion is debt. We need to slash public assistance." I'd rather be self dependent than depend on anyone.
Mark my words. One day in the near future when our economy tanks hard, the people who are getting public assistance are going to be screwed.
From my understanding this is more of a minimum floor, if you earn less it trues you up, if you earn more you don't get it.
Not saying its the best idea ever however I'm game for someone trying it out.
I dont want to live or work in a society where employees at every company reflect the demographics of that society
Europe doesn't have the sort of ingrained racism that exists in the United States
markup languages are useless as a file format you send across the internet
Perl just works. I thoroughly enjoy coding in it. I've not spent too much time optimizing and testing code though.
I cannot, almost as a rule, trust anybody who has not tried a variety of mind altering substances.
What a nasty characterization of the un- & under employed. It oozes undeserved self righteousness.
you do realize that this model replaces all of welfare for the recipients, and is actually less "Free lazy-making cash" than they otherwise would receive, right?
so, tell me why:
--receiving less money with no restrictions to purchasing is going to make them just as lazy, if not lazier than the current welfare model?
--spending less tax-payer money on this social program is...bad?
Are you saying that a crack dealer is automatically black? Are you saying that only blacks drink 40s? Can't a white person buy a Cadillac? You made an awful lot of racial assumptions there, sounds like the problem is your own.
So tell us this:
When the mom blows her money and can't afford rent/her share of assisted living, and/or food, for either herself and/or especially her kids, the system will then be setup to let her and her kids pay for her bad decision(s), right?
Because I'm betting taxpayer dollars to SJW donuts that what's really going to happen in that scenario - which will play out again, and again, and again, and...well, you get the point - is the persistent sobbing whine (just like every other SJW persistent sobbing whine) will be, 'Oh look at that poor single mother and her 2/3/4/5 kids!, she's doing the best she can, she just needs a little more help! <insert direct or implied You're a racist/misogynist/xenophobe if you don't want to give her more money to (mis)manage!>
The problem most people have isn't that people are being helped. It's that the people are un-helpable because they're a.) in too F'd up of a persistent situation to ever be savable (read: we will constantly pay for them and their spawn) and/or b.) too F'ing stupid/selfish/accustomed/lazy to get off the Gov teat (read: we will constantly pay for them and their spawn). So the money keeps being spent, month after month, year after year, decade after decade, and lookee there!, there is never and real change! But wait! If only! If only, more money/subsidy was given to them! Yes! That must be The Solution!
(meanwhile, Pedro who can speak less English that 4th Gen subsidy recipient has two jobs ((but to be SJW sure, they're absolutely only 'jobs Americans won't do!)), his own truck, and his kid ((legal or illegal)) is getting B's in school and can already speak better English as a zero generation student than the 5th Gen future subsidy kids...I mean...just how does that happen and oh yeah!, we really need to give them mo munney!)
It never ends with the SJW crowd, never...
Doesn't this already happen with Section 8 + food Stamps?