Sam's conversation with his Canadian socialist friend on Sunday, July 9, 2017

[Justplain]

How to pay for the basic needs of your citizenry? Chop military budgets by 80% and there's lots of money. If you want more taxable income within capitalist framework, free up the middle class who are the real innovators and growth industry creators. To get the tech you need to create unparalelled wealth, declassify almost all black budget projects.

Dont waste time blaming the poor for being lazy or sluggish. The real problem is the red tape or unregulated trade that benefits only the very few and lays waste to the rest. And yes, tax the crap out of the super rich, too.

[AutumnW]

By all means, tax the sh** out of the super wealthy. "But they worked hard for their money!" many of the obsequious wannabes exclaim. So do people who get hooked on meth so they can work three jobs and stay awake to support the deadbeats at the top.

[neutronstar]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
They've already done at least 2 studies on basic income trials that I know of, one of them in Greece, and one of the Scandinavian countries is looking into it now too.

I learned about the Greek study from an article when it was first launched. The study had long concluded and must have released its findings, but I couldn't find them on the Internet anywhere despite looking up the researchers involved in the study and trying to find lists of their works.

The other country that did a study, which I believe may have been Spain or Portugal, also didn't have their results up anywhere.

I suspect I already know what the results indicated, but I would absolutely like to find these studies or any like them to see what exactly they show.




Also, just some quick numbers...

Providing a basic income of only $200 a month to all Americans would cost about $770 trillion dollars a year.

Providing it to even 1/4 of Americans would still be almost $200 trillion a year.

And you can't do much with only $200 a month. Not even afford rent.

Current national debt, as outrageous as it is after years of accumulated debt, is still only about $20 trillion.

Those numbers are not right. I rounded the pop. of the US to 400 million, and if you paid every one 20,000 a year it would cost 8 trillion dollars.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Flash (here)
where are those quick numbers from?

$200 a month x 12 months year x 320 million people. But I counted the zeroes wrong and it should have been billions instead of trillions, as Sam pointed out to me. But then again $200 a month doesn't really buy anything, either.

Canada has the population of California. Why not make it state based? Would be calculated differently and more accurately.

I'm all for decentralization and giving the states more say in how they run their economies. This is actually a very conservative position in the US that goes back to the founders. But if basic universal income came to my state I would vote hell no and I'm sure most others here would too.

Gosh guys, a simple look to what is done ELSEWHERE with a working economy would tell you how to do it. Protection of Corporation and private interests are soooooo ingrained in your mentality in the US that it even stop you from looking around the world.

We must have different ideas of what economy means and what the point of studying it is. In the 1950's the US was accounting for something like 80% of the entire world's production. That is a successful economy. Today western nations piddle around with big chunks of their populations on welfare, and with massive trade deficits and national debts, and that is not the description of a "working economy."

The Obamacare was the epithomy of bad management and bad decision making, I was 100% sure it would fail, just because of too much relying on private insurance industry to start with and many other wrong décisions. But hey, it is AMERICA and it ought to be right ...... nobody else on the planet knows. QUite arrogant in my views. JUst look around...

When we look around we don't see the same things that you see because we have no interest in them. Socialist Europe is something we frown at in disappointment, not look up to in breathless reverence. I know they constantly parade statistics about how terrible things are in America, because I read European media, but we see what's going on over there and in other countries and I want nothing to do with any of it.

[Flash]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by Flash (here)
where are those quick numbers from?

When we look around we don't see the same things that you see because we have no interest in them. Socialist Europe is something we frown at in disappointment, not look up to in breathless reverence. I know they constantly parade statistics about how terrible things are in America, because I read European media, but we see what's going on over there and in other countries and I want nothing to do with any of it.

And the reciprocal is true as well. Unless you are very rich or an actor, Canadians do not want to live in the US = except for old people looking for sun few months per year. But nobody with a family or even a career wants to make it there.

Europeans who would live in the US is because, most of the time, they have not even visited yet. When they do, seeing the incredible poverty of some neighborhoods, they prefer to return home. What is actually destroying their home is relentless refugees crisis - otherwise, their cities are pretty sane, clean and not dangerous when compared to the US.

Anyhow, those are different vision of the world. I do not understand why often American do not even want to look at other visions. They truly think theirs is it - but it ain't. As long as we do not take all the creativity of all the planet, we will lose in the end. Other countries may have part of the answer for the US. Why not looking at it? Truthfully look with curiosity and imagination to find solutions for one's own society?

Personnally, I do not want to be obliged to keep a job just for the sake of having medical insurance - this is slavery literally. And I do not want to be penalised lifelong for paying healthcare bills because I did not have an insurance but got in a car accident for example. This is just one example, there is thousands of them (another one being 2 weeks of vacation a year, who can rest in two weeks? who can take care of his personal business in two weeks or care for a sick relative?). Europeans have one month, this seems more reasonable to me.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by neutronstar (here)
I rounded the pop. of the US to 400 million, and if you paid every one 20,000 a year it would cost 8 trillion dollars.

If we say 320 million Americans but let's say we exclude the richest 20 million or so and make it just 300 million.

And poverty line I think is around $14,000, so let's just say only basic income to be poor is provided and no more (why not? people want free luxuries next right?).

$14k a year x 300 million people is $4,200,000,000,000, or $4.2 trillion dollars per year.

Federal government revenue is $3.5 trillion a year. So the federal gov makes $3.5 trillion a year but on top of paying for military, roads, medicaid, medicare, Obamacare, and everything else, we'd have to pay $4.2 trillion more a year. We are already spending more than we make, thus the deficit. It took a good number of years to rack up about $20 trillion debt. We'd be adding over $4 trillion more a year.

Even if we only assured everyone made it to the poverty level and paid no more than that, we're still already paying for more stuff than we can afford.

Make someone should think of a way to put people to work actually doing something instead of thinking of people merely as the receiving end of a government check. The slave plantation still exists.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Flash (here)

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by Flash (here)
where are those quick numbers from?

When we look around we don't see the same things that you see because we have no interest in them. Socialist Europe is something we frown at in disappointment, not look up to in breathless reverence. I know they constantly parade statistics about how terrible things are in America, because I read European media, but we see what's going on over there and in other countries and I want nothing to do with any of it.

And the reciprocal is true as well.

That's fine. If I'm okay with letting each state govern itself then how much less do I care what foreign countries think? I actually think it's a terrible thing that people feel the need to go around the world preaching their worldview to others, whether they're American or Canadian or Muslim or Chinese. That's why the US is in such a bad place today, because of the Yankee idea, that originated with the Puritan pilgrims, to go around preaching their brand of self-righteous evangelism whether anyone wanted to hear it or not, and even trying to force it on others.

You probably wonder why we don't like other systems because you lean socialist, at least from a US standpoint, most governments of the world today lean socialist in their policies of nationalizing everything "for the public good," and many Americans absolutely abhor the idea of government seizing control of these things. I understand the ideas underlying your systems but I think the real problem is that you simply never studied the American founders or the philosophy that our Constitution is actually based on. If you understood those people then you wouldn't be so confused as to why so many of us still absolutely reject your systems. It's thoroughly American to reject big government and has been from the start. We want to be responsible for ourselves, come good or evil, not depend on government like a crutch to get through life.

[Flash]

there is one thing that has to be mention about all European countries and Canada who got their socialistic tendencies and coverages (healthcare, employment insurance, welfare, etc). All those were instituted in the 60's, when govenrments were not as powerful and moslty not as corrupted. It was possible then to create policies for the people, without too much diverting the original intentions of the policies.

I do not think it would still be possible today. Too much corruption at all levels of governments, too much lack of ethics, and too much lobbyist and overtaking by large international corporations.

And yes, I know the American history probably better than most American and the inspiration beneath the US constitution as well (with the founding fathers). I know European history much less, although better than most lay person as well.

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by Flash (here)

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by Flash (here)
where are those quick numbers from?

When we look around we don't see the same things that you see because we have no interest in them. Socialist Europe is something we frown at in disappointment, not look up to in breathless reverence. I know they constantly parade statistics about how terrible things are in America, because I read European media, but we see what's going on over there and in other countries and I want nothing to do with any of it.

And the reciprocal is true as well.

That's fine. If I'm okay with letting each state govern itself then how much less do I care what foreign countries think? I actually think it's a terrible thing that people feel the need to go around the world preaching their worldview to others, whether they're American or Canadian or Muslim or Chinese. That's why the US is in such a bad place today, because of the Yankee idea, that originated with the Puritan pilgrims, to go around preaching their brand of self-righteous evangelism whether anyone wanted to hear it or not, and even trying to force it on others.

You probably wonder why we don't like other systems because you lean socialist, at least from a US standpoint, most governments of the world today lean socialist in their policies of nationalizing everything "for the public good," and many Americans absolutely abhor the idea of government seizing control of these things. I understand the ideas underlying your systems but I think the real problem is that you simply never studied the American founders or the philosophy that our Constitution is actually based on. If you understood those people then you wouldn't be so confused as to why so many of us still absolutely reject your systems. It's thoroughly American to reject big government and has been from the start. We want to be responsible for ourselves, come good or evil, not depend on government like a crutch to get through life.

[TargeT]

Posted by Flash (here)
Personnally, I do not want to be obliged to keep a job just for the sake of having medical insurance - this is slavery literally.

You just want to take someones labor for free... because? (doctors don't work for free btw. but you still want their services with out paying anything??)

YOU would be the literal slave master at that point, or at least a slave-labor beneficiary.

Posted by Flash (here)
And I do not want to be penalised lifelong for paying healthcare bills because I did not have an insurance but got in a car accident for example.

And this is why Americans think most other countries are crazy

haha, HOW are you being penalized for paying bills on services that you received? how can your understanding of the fundamentals of capitalism be that skewed?


Entitlement is a disease.

[AutumnW]

"Entitlement is a Disease." And its manifestation in the upper tiers amount the rentier class is profoundly disabling.

[Chester]

A personal comment - Because of this thread (which I am responsible for creating) I faced the fact that I may not be in a good position to make any pronouncements of what I think is best for the United States. This is because, at age 21, all I had to do was "breath" for receiving a basic income. So expanding on this a bit further, because of this "free income" I lived a life where some might say, "I am lucky to have survived" because of the chances I took with regards to a.) my bipolar condition and b.) my serious issues with addictions (most specifically with alcohol and drugs - mostly illegal drugs depending on where and when... marijuana and cocaine).

Because of the "free money" I was able to take risks with regards to my lifestyle where I had the funding to take those risks and I had the funding to be saved from taking those risks. Thus I can count having experienced 10 bona fide serious psychosis, have been able to recall being in 14 psychiatric/rehab facilities and 11 jails directly because of this dual condition combined with my "free money" funding.

My point is that on one hand, the free money enabled my denial and yet, if I had not had the free money where I either was able to afford psychiatric/rehab care or the lawyers needed to limit my legal exposure, I might not have reached the age where I finally accepted my dual condition and have done (and continue to do) what I needed to do, where this condition is under control such that I don't go nuts and don't get arrested for DWI or weed or worse, cocaine.

Forgive the long post but I always feel compelled to explain myself in this regard because I think it matters - especially with regards to the specific reason I made this post - a universal guaranteed minimum income made available to all. On one hand, the argument can be made that I have zero experience in NOT having this income because... I always have had it! And if that is the case, how could I possibly make a case against it? Yet on the other hand, I am an example of someone who had the ability to avoid taking personal responsibility for the facts of my life circumstances... the fact that I have this dual condition... and I am extremely lucky to have survived that. And so from this perspective I have at least one leg to stand on when it comes to proclaiming a position of "good" or "bad" and doing so based on actual personal experience.

And so, after making sure I am completely transparent as I have now done in this post, I am now poised to share my position and my reasons as to why I have this position.

And this needs to be a separate post as it is not a short two or three liner.

[AutumnW]

Posted by sdv (here)

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
When I started looking into starting my own business, my eyes were opened to what small business owners suffer through over-regulation and taxations, and how much blame they have unduly received for all of society's ills by the typical ignorant communist radical types.

People think that "the rich" are the problem and we should just tax the hell out of them, but even someone who makes $1 million a year is not employing that many people (and not because he's taking all the money, which is a very naive way of thinking of business -- there are typically ridiculous amounts of expenses). And that is how we should REALLY be thinking of people, rather than how much money they are making: what they are actually contributing to the economy, how many families they are feeding by putting people to work, etc.

People like the Rockefellers or George Soros have so much money you'll never even see it all on paper. They hide it away in charities and various assets or however they can manage to hide it from taxation or anything else. They are obscenely wealthy on an entirely different level than even people like Donald Trump. If you look at the Clinton Foundation and how much money was pouring into it, for example (many billions), and consider the fact that the Clintons were using all of that money for personal expenses indiscriminately, then even the Clintons are much richer than Trump. And who is the real burden here: the man who actually builds buildings and puts people to work in hotels and casinos, or the family who accepts billions in "charity donations" but then actually spends very little of it on any sort of real charity work? Because that is the difference between how they were making their money before the election.

I abhor obscene wealth and just do not understand why anyone would want billions (a view that annoys those who love money and buying stuff!). However, I am starting to think that with regard to inequality, it is not the rich causing the problem but the poor being shut out of opportunities to succeed. Even if you do provide free education (as South Africa does for the poor), children who are malnourished are not able to learn (even with a school feeding scheme, after the long holidays, it takes children a month or two to be able to overcome the effect of undernourishment), schools in poor areas are not able to supplement the basics through donations from the community, and so on. People are not equal but should be given equal opportunities, and how do you define what is an equal opportunity?

How do you define equal opportunity in the U.S, for example, when there are clearly two Americas -- and they interact less and less with one another?

The ability to climb up, leveraged off where you attended school, has vanished. Without this crucial ability to ladder up from the underclass, those without capital, are removed from the greater social umbrella of wealth.

And...as the middle class is vanishing, the social ladder is no longer adequate -- a pole vault is required.

There are opportunities to create your own business, without capital, in the service sector. But...those niches have been explored to the max. How many more massage therapists and life coaches do we need? And, fewer and fewer individuals outside of the technocratic and monied elite, can afford these services.

This thread is about a basic income for displaced people, a large and growing part of the population, who are there through no fault of their own. We all know people who are just basically lethargic and parasitic...but they are a small number compared to the growing number of people in the service industries, working very hard just to survive, or underemployed and living with their parents.

I compare it to an old 'snakes and ladders' game where most of the ladders up are gone, replaced by many snakes that take a person right back down.

Does the situation have a remedy currently, that one can possibly envision without summoning images of Venezuela? In the U.S., I would say, no, and for precisely that reason. Any alternative to a capitalist system that has become exploitive and rapacious is automatically equated with squalid Socialism gone to Hell, in places like Venezuela. And if that is the popular vision of socialism, it is in part based on the dynamics of extreme corruption in the U.S. itself.

As Flash has emphasized and others have described, the U.S. will not easily tend towards a sane quiet and workable form of socialism, like Sweden.

And for those who want to debate this points, rather than discuss them, please do the predictable and link to all the videos you can about a failed Swedish system where 'Islamic people have taken over.' LOL

Too add to the bizarre nature of these arguments are Americans who decry socialism while their government pours trillions of dollars into a sinkhole of military spending.

[AutumnW]

Sam, things are SO different now for those faced with having to accept a basic income or...nothing at all, or certainly not enough to get by on. I hear what you are saying and appreciate the points you make. I was in a sink,or swim situation as a young adult, before my illness was properly diagnosed.

As sick as I was, I HAD to create my own business or become a hooker. Those were my choices. I had pretty severe damage to parts of my brain (not psychosis) from the illness -- and reduced stamina. It was very very scary.

I managed to niche myself in to the economy, at that time. But a big emphasis on, 'at that time.' There is the same demand, as when I was young, for these services, but the supply of labor is crazy high. It doesn't match. That is the problem.

Were I to try to even gain employment in this industry today, I would be out competed by thousands of job applicants.

[TargeT]

Posted by AutumnW (here)
"Entitlement is a Disease." And its manifestation in the upper tiers amount the rentier class is profoundly disabling.

No, it's a product of reality, if you go look at the world and how it works you'll only find one class of species that lives via entitlement behavior... that's Parasites. Parasites weaken the whole (host)....

This mentality will corrupt the whole, as we've seen in china and Russia... just doesn't work in reality.

You cannot TAKE from a system with out giving something and still expect that system to exist. this is as basic as basic gets... you eat a cookie, it's gone...

Plus we have countless examples that free-money never works... that's why the native american population in the US is still mostly devistated... Look to alaska for a perfect example (highest rate of incest, alcoholism, domestic violence... want to guess at why?)

Posted by AutumnW (here)
How do you define equal opportunity in the U.S, for example, when there are clearly two Americas -- and they interact less and less with one another?

The ability to climb up, leveraged off where you attended school, has vanished. Without this crucial ability to ladder up from the underclass, those without capital, are removed from the greater social umbrella of wealth.

And...as the middle class is vanishing, the social ladder is no longer adequate -- a pole vault is required.

There are opportunities to create your own business, without capital, in the service sector. But...those niches have been explored to the max. How many more massage therapists and life coaches do we need? And, fewer and fewer individuals outside of the technocratic and monied elite, can afford these services.

I grew up very poor, single mother making 30,000 a year (which, at the time I thought was an ungodly amount of money).

I now live in the Caribbean, own a house, business, 5 vehicles and have 5 employees.

I'm in my 30's...

Are you saying what I did isn't possible? I didn't even really plan it, imagine if I had actually tried hard?

Maybe if people didn't come home and watch TV they'd find they have many productive hours in a day... maybe the issue is more with the population and less with the government (because the population IS the government when it comes down to it, at least in the US it still is; since we are mostly armed still).

I know a LOT of people with VERY LITTLE motivation, I myself suffer from this from time to time. Yes the market has shifted. but how many people are making 100,000+ a year from YOUTUBE now?

Put out effort, get rewards... that's how reality works, that's how every business owner I interact with down here did it, and now we all help each other.


I think your right, there ARE two classes.

Those that DO, and those that DONT.

[AutumnW]

Target,

I am not saying it is impossible to do what you did. In the Great Depression some people also managed to get ahead. Not nearly as many -- but some defied all the odds.

Btw, I thought you were currently in the military? I am surprised. Also, the employees that you have hired...are they full time and will they be able to 'rise through the ranks,' or be able to accomplish what you have accomplished one day?

[TargeT]

Posted by AutumnW (here)
Target,

I am not saying it is impossible to do what you did. In the Great Depression some people also managed to get ahead. Not nearly as many -- but some defied all the odds.

I don't think the great depression is a very good metaphor for right now, but I may look back in 10 years and think you were spot on

I think the market is shifting, and it's shifting rapidly.. Plenty of opportunity for money making endeavors out there but you have to think out side the box and not just "get in line for a job".

We see this with the LARGE amount of people making a living off Youtube and other social media outlets (brand new career field and potentially VERY high paying). New service industries popping up left and right (phone/small electronics repair can be a full time gig, my friend used to do that in Alaska and make decent money at it). Wrapping cars in vinyl can be a very successful business if your in an area that works for that.

There's literally so much out there, if I had capital I'd start 3 additional businesses today with a very high certainty of success. As it is I've pushed my next business out another 3-5 years while I expand this one.


Do or don't do. it's your choice..

It's always about choice, we need VERY LITTLE to survive; to just "live" the rest.. is choice.


Some of the kids I work with in the projects PROUDLY tell everyone they never drink water, only "product X" or "Product Y"... this is a CHOICE (and a very poor one).

I had been enjoying my life style and "playing" a lot (eating out all the time, being generous etc..) but it got me a bit behind, so this year I buckled down & changed, now I eat out maybe once a month and have been aggressively paying down debts to prepare for further expansion.

again, it's about choice. Motivation is a choice as well, one I force myself to... I'm inherently pretty lazy, i think a lot of us are

Posted by AutumnW (here)
Btw, I thought you were currently in the military? I am surprised. Also, the employees that you have hired...are they full time and will they be able to 'rise through the ranks,' or be able to accomplish what you have accomplished one day?

I'm presently as military as McDonald's is food. (haha)

I am currently in the National Guard (1 weekends a month, 2 weeks a year.. or so they advertise), but I also work FOR the national guard full time ( so there's two jobs)

I also started two businesses, one is a horse rescue, and the other is guided tours to pay for the horse rescue (jobs 3 and 4).

Both of those sets of jobs complement each other (working for the NG and being in the NG.... running the rescue and the tours). so it sounds a bit more hectic than it is.

[neutronstar]

Not everyone can start a business, otherwise no one would have a business because no one would have employees. Unless of course you ran the business yourself.

I once learned about a business owner in California that had a bakery. He paid everyone that worked for him an equal portion of the profits, including himself. Everything about the business improved, the quality, the quantity, they were the most successful bakery in town. The people working for him took pride in his business because they benefited when the company did. It was like everyone owned it. Everyone had their role and every job was important. They all made about 60,000 a year on average. That is the only way a system based on money can work is if everyone makes the same amount. Why dose someone need to make more money than someone else working the same amount of hours.

Every job that benefits humanity is no more or less important than any other job that benefits humanity. All other jobs can be done away with, but in our society they are the jobs that seem to make people the richest.

We don't care about each other,we are selfish. There was a study done that had people play monopoly, the game. They gave some people unfair advantages in the game, like more money, extra turns. The people that got the advantages became very greedy. It wasn't the people either because everyone took turns having the advantages. Everyone that got the breaks became very greedy.

It is pretty sad, but that is who we are when it come to money. It also has been proven that poor people give more to charity.

[Bob]

What is intellectual property worth? If one is labouring around a business which utilises another person (or group's) "IP" should they all be paid the same as the IP owner? Or a premium?

What about those who contribute start-up capital? Should they be paid back more than daily labourers?

Or should the IP owners or the capital contributers be paid a premium? Curious philosophy to ask about..

[neutronstar]

Posted by Bob (here)
What is intellectual property worth? If one is labouring around a business which utilises another person (or group's) "IP" should they all be paid the same as the IP owner? Or a premium?

What about those who contribute start-up capital? Should they be paid back more than daily labourers?

Or should the IP owners or the capital contributers be paid a premium? Curious philosophy to ask about..

Well now your asking complicated questions.

I'll revert back to my statement earlier in the thread. If humanity grew up and started to care about each other, and that means everyone, we would do away with money, and do what needed to be done, so every person on earth had food, clothing, shelter, healthcare and anything else that was important. There would be more than enough people to do all the jobs that we needed, and people wouldn't have to work that many hours in a day. I would be surprised if it took more than a couple hours a day.

I don't know how humanity can get to this point. It seems so logical to me. Am I F**king weird or something that I think this way. What is wrong with this idea.

[Daozen]

I don't think it's so much about 'getting rid' of money... Just providing so much food, water, clothes and other basics at a local level, that the rat race is greatly diminished. Then money starts to lose it's hold on people.

A new direction has to come from a humanity that grows up and starts googling this stuff, I agree.

Change will come from engineers and innovators, at a local level. Expect nothing from politicians and the chattering classes.

Look at the last two, twenty, or two thousand years of history. Any rise in standards of living on this planet has come from backyard innovators who eventually scaled their ideas.