this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
405 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2762 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (4 children)

UBI will ultimately end up in the pockets of landlords, shareholders and offshore wealth funds anyway. Sort out the inequality first, then do it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

I do agree with this, without restriction on increases that x increase will just go into basic living services, you saw that with the stimulus checks as well. but part of me wants them to do it then go after everyoje that raised for gorging but I don't think there is actual prevention of that

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Source: trust me, bro.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think that's a misconception. UBI is not free money for all. There will not be appreciably more money sloshing around.

Taxation will be balanced around the average earner giving back the same amount of money in tax as they get in UBI.

People below average will be better off. People above average will be worse off. People way up in the 0.01% will be considerably worse off.

Guess which of those groups keeps inventing new reasons why UBI won't work.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The well-off will never be not well-off unless they literally depend on the people's exploitation. If they do, well, like they say, its like whoever the technological advances they depend on immediately put out of commission in terms of employment options off the table

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The point of UBI isn't to sit in the pockets of the working class. It's to properly stimulate the economy while giving the working class spending money. It's meant to be spent, meant to go up the chain.

The biggest problem right now is non competitive markets that we have to pay into like housing, communications, utilities, and groceries. We need to get The trust busting hammer out. Competitive markets keep prices low. And for markets that can't be competitive, well they shouldn't be markets, they should be government agencies.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Working class people are becoming less and less competitive in the market because too much money is being extracted from them through rent/profit/interest and given to their wealthy competitors who already have an advantage over them. Both ends of the equation need addressing, which is why I think UBI is good but not enough without taxing wealth. That's just my opinion!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I agree. I wonder if we could create a class based Union. Like a union for anyone making x amount or less.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

And most importantly take people out of the job market.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

UBI also addresses the welfare chasm. In many cases, people on welfare who want to work can't, because working means they're ineligible for welfare but their income is less than what they make on welfare. It's a sort of trap that keeps many people in the welfare system.

UBI fills the gap, and allows people who want to work, but who are unable to work full time, or are unskilled and are qualified for only the lowest paying, entry-level jobs, to take that work, build skills and experience, and pull themselves up out of the welfare system.

UBI often assumes that it replaces welfare as we know it, but you'd get the same benefit if the bar for disqualifying welfare was higher, s.t. people could still claim welfare while working, until they reached some more sustainable income level.

It's not the main goal is UBI, but UBI would address this one very real issue we have with the current welfare system.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Means testing means not universal.

I frankly don’t give a shit if Bezos gets a $1000 check from the government every month, as long as the old lady with cancer, the 40 year old chronic pain sufferer, the working family with a 80k/yr income, and the 35 year old jobless dude who lives with his parents all get theirs too.