Andrew Yang, Yellow Politician 2020

[abrakamowse]

I didn't know about him, but I like him... Bernie is a bit old in my opinion.

Let's see what happens.

[Commodent]

I'm just thinking, isn't implementing UBI before universal health care and free college kinda premature? I just can't imagine the US suddenly going all super saiyan on social security (which UBI pretty much is). Covering healthcare and education is too socialistic, but giving away free money to cover all needs is just gonna get a pass? Yeah, I think Leo is on point with not jumping too far ahead on the spiral...

Also, what is his stance on redistribution of wealth? Seems to be a crucial lacking component.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Commodent

[CreamCat]

2 hours ago, Commodent said:

Also, what is his stance on redistribution of wealth? Seems to be a crucial lacking component.

UBI is a very good form of wealth redistribution. It gives poor people wealth in terms of money and time.

Free time is also wealth. Free time for human kind. Just think about the kinds of projects you can launch with your free time. I want to get UBI for myself.

Right now, a lot of rich people also have jobs they would rather not have. UBI might give them free time, too.

it's a safety net for the poor and the rich.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  So how exactly is it redistribution if you're not increasing the taxes for rich people, i.e. if the rich people don't pay more? UBI in and of itself doesn't ensure that they pay more.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Commodent

[CreamCat]

19 minutes ago, Commodent said:

@CreamCat  So how exactly is it redistribution if you're not increasing the taxes for rich people, i.e. if the rich people don't pay more? UBI in and of itself doesn't ensure that they pay more.

I don't know the details of implementation. But, you can first liquidate most conditional welfare programs to partially fund UBI. Don't ask me about where the rest will come from. Ask the experts.

[Commodent]

@CreamCat I'm just saying, UBI in and of itself does not redistribute wealth as it still gets the funds from the same sources as other social services, mainly tax payers that is. If you don't know the details can you at least give me a broad idea? Because otherwise you don't really have an argument. Liquidating welfare programs does not redistribute wealth. And what would that be good for? More capitalism, i.e. less collective ownership?

[CreamCat]

9 minutes ago, Commodent said:

If you don't know the details can you at least give me a broad idea?

http://www.scottsantens.com/basic-income-faq will probably answer every question you might have about UBI.

In hindsight, I think Andrew Yang can become a friend with scott santens.

Whether UBI redistributes wealth or not, I like it. I'm going to benefit from it. It's going to lift pressure off of me. It's going to give me relaxed free time. I would spend UBI on my projects.

UBI is going to be definitely friendly with personal projects. It's venture capital for the mass.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  One of your links suggests UBI can be funded by creating land value tax, and that is a good idea. However, that is not what Andrew Yang is advocating. How one chooses to fund UBI can vary a lot and does not ensure that inequality will be dealt with. You could have an America with the same inequality issues that it has today with the only difference being that everyone gets a thousand dollars on top. And as we all know, too much inequality is not beneficial to a society in any way.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Commodent

[CreamCat]

22 minutes ago, Commodent said:

@CreamCat  One of your links suggests UBI can be funded by creating land value tax, and that is a good idea. However, that is not what Andrew Yang is advocating. How one chooses to fund UBI can vary a lot and does not ensure that inequality will be dealt with. You could have an America with the same inequality issues that it has today with the only difference being that everyone gets a thousand dollars on top. And as we all know, too much inequality is not beneficial to a society in any way.

I prefer an inequal society where everyone is free from jobs to an equal society where everyone has to work their ass off.

Inequality is relative. Having to work one's ass off is not.

Let's say that in the year 2200, even a poor person is free from a job and has a robot servant and the richest people own spaceships. I'd prefer that to a primitive egalitarian tribe where everyone is more or less equal but has to work their ass off everyday. A poor person from that future civilization is far richer than the richest person from such a tribe.

Inequality is relative, man. Inequality doesn't tell anything about the absolute level of life quality. What if being the poorest person in a specific region means being able to fuck a hot girl every day without worrying about making money?

History tells us that equality often means everyone is at the rock bottom.

I value freedom and absolute wealth more than equality. What's important is to have a good life, not to be equal to others and then surpass others.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  Uhm, here in Norway where I live, which I dare say is a fairly equal society, everyone is definitely not working their ass off. So I don't really understand your argument.

[CreamCat]

@Commodent My argument is that I don't care about equality much. I care about absolute level of life quality, not the relative one. I'd rather be a poor person in futuristic heaven than an equal member in a shit hole.

I know human ego wants to be equal to others and then become superior to others. People don't really care much about equality. They actually care about superiority. When you become superior, you don't care about equality.

Equality doesn't necessarily lead to better life quality. Equality may or may not coincide with better life quality.

And, norway is nowhere near equality.

The paradox is that people are equal and unequal. Don't get hung up on equality too much.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  Money is freedom, and with some people sitting on the vast chunk of resources you're gonna find yourself restricted, no matter if you're getting a thousand dollars or not (which, mind you, is barely enough to live by). Good luck trying to accomplish anything truly meaningful in life with money that is barely enough to secure your own survival.

[lmfao]

@Commodent @martins name (can't get rid of the @martins name on mobile)

 

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by lmfao

[CreamCat]

@Commodent Unconditional free money is still far more humane and far better than getting none. Remember that.

There's a vast difference between $0 and $1000 per month. You are free to not take UBI when it's offered. I'll take it.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Aeris]

1 hour ago, Commodent said:

@CreamCat  Uhm, here in Norway where I live, which I dare say is a fairly equal society, everyone is definitely not working their ass off. So I don't really understand your argument.

define when someone is "working their ass off", as an artist, listening music, doing sometimes drugs, even having relation/going at party for social presence, and drawing while listening podcast is probably the best way to fit my job. So being mostly a piece of shit to the eyes of the mass ( I m sober 80% of the year though ). I reads books, and do a lot of others things like contributing to political understanding and writting my own books.

maybe some people just play video games, but I did too, when they'll find no more meaning in it, they'll stop it, and in another case, they can contribute as being "good player" some top hard video game player explain how to excell in others area of life now ( there is video of pro starcraft player teaching you life and entrepreneurship now haha )

[Commodent]

@lmfao  I've already seen that. His suggestions are not anywhere near enough to handle the economic inequality, and probably not enough to cover UBI.

@CreamCat UBI is a step in right direction, but right now the inequality problem is long overdue. The way I see it, either vastly more taxes will be implemented as part of UBI, thus also handling the inequality problem, or UBI is not gonna work. You seem to speak merely of how UBI is gonna affect your life, but I am not interested in that but rather how it's gonna affect the society as a whole.

2 hours ago, CreamCat said:

And, norway is nowhere near equality.

Please, do tell me more about how it is in Norway. I have always wondered.

@Aeris So you want me to define what "working their ass off" would be in your case? Only you can do that, buddy.. I can just say that I would generally define it as working more than 37,5 hours a week

Edited March 17, 2019 by Commodent

[CreamCat]

7 hours ago, Commodent said:

The way I see it, either vastly more taxes will be implemented as part of UBI, thus also handling the inequality problem, or UBI is not gonna work.

It can be true, but it can also be just an overblown concern.

7 hours ago, Commodent said:

Please, do tell me more about how it is in Norway. I have always wondered.

The only kind of equality I know is shared misery at the rock bottom. At the rock bottom, everyone is more or less equal. Norway is far from the rock bottom. The rock bottom means the stone age. Do you want to nuke the world back to the stone age? The richest people in Norway are probably million times as wealthy as you are. That's also far from equality.

I also think USA's inequality won't become too problematic if UBI is in place. In my humble opinion, inequality becomes problematic only when the bottom truly sucks. UBI makes the bottom suck a lot less. It will give people enough room to breathe and launch themselves up as long as they are not lazy.

Edited March 17, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  Then you have a very skewed view of equality, my friend. Of course, I don't mean we are all equal in the most literal sense, Norway does of course have rich people. However, you have to work a lot harder to earn significantly above the mean in Norway than you would for example in the US. For example, the average software developer only earns 37.8% more than the average store clerk, and richer people are also significantly more taxed.

[CreamCat]

@Commodent It's better to say that there is less inequality in norway than in USA. Equality can mean different things to different people.

I hope the bottom is comfortable in norway. It sounds as if it were difficult to rise above the average but not difficult to descend to the bottom in norway.

Edited March 18, 2019 by CreamCat

[Commodent]

@CreamCat  I'm just saying the US has a serious inequality issue that needs to be fixed, i.e. you need more equality. I'm not advocating absolute equality. Thought that was quite obvious.

Not difficult to descend to the bottom? Where do you get that from?

Edited March 18, 2019 by Commodent