Presidential candidate Andrew Yang

[Joshuas]

@Leo Gura What your opinion is on Andrew Yang as a presidential candidate?

• You call out for visionary politicians, this man certainly seems to be so. Also to me he seems to range from stage orange to yellow (with a decent amount in yellow without demonising green).
• He did a Joe rogan podcast - where he was able to outline his points very clearly - and was on the Rubin Report which both are higher quality media than television show which enabled him (so far) to present his points more clearly

I ask because you promote Bernie Sanders, it almost seems to me like you overlooked Andrew yang, which would be a shame. (obviously my own opinion is showing through) Yang seems to be more suited for the world to come then Bernie. So i wonder why your vote is not skewing his side.

[Leo Gura]

I am well aware of Yang.

I watched many of his interviews and speeches.

He is definitely very authentic, smart, and in some ways visionary.

But I have some serious problems with his proposals:

• He uses UBI as a universal solution to too many issues. UBI is good but it cannot solve all the problems he proposes.
• He wants to fund UBI through VAT taxes, which is a bad idea in my opinion because it is a tax on the poor not the rich.
• His UBI also goes to rich people who don't need it at all and it counts against other government benefits like social security and food stamps.
• He is against free college for all.
• He is against Medicare For All.
• He is against $15 minimum wage.
• He seems to hold some libertarian notions.
• He does not directly question the structural problems of capitalism itself.

Yang is good, but Bernie is better. If Bernie proposed a UBI, Yang would basically have nothing left to stand on. I think Bernie should propose a UBI in addition to everything else he stands for.

I give Yang lots of credit for proposing UBI in the first place, and for talking about job automation.

The final problem is: he simply doesn't poll well. I don't think he has a serious chance of winning the primary. Of course that could change, but Bernie has much better odds in my estimation.

But in the end if Yang wins, I would be happy too.

[Commodent]

There's also another thing I don't like about him. From his webpage:

"Andrew proposes funding UBI by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value-Added Tax (VAT) of 10%"

Notice how "consolidating" is just a nicer word for "dismantling". He wants to replace the welfare state with UBI, so that capitalism can continue to run wild.

[Leo Gura]

@Commodent Yes, that is the core problem with his version of UBI.

He is still too much business-minded about government. Government is not and should not be a business.

[Inliytened1]

@Leo Gura really looking forward to your political lectures.  I am really looking for a way to evolve both.  Being completely anti-capitalism is  not the path.  (Not suggesting you are) But There is a unification.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Inliytened1

[Joseph Maynor]

It's not just having ideas that makes Political Work an aspect of Personal/Interpersonal Development Work.  It's getting great ideas implemented.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Joseph Maynor

[Inliytened1]

@Joseph Maynor that is the damn truth.

[Leo Gura]

@Inliytened1 You are correct. Anti-capitalism is a trap. There needs to be an intelligent synthesis of capitalism and socialism. Which is really already the case. We do not live in a purely capitalist system and we never have.

[montecristo]

I also disagree with some of the specifics of Yang's UBI but I think it may be just the measured dose of radical paradigm shifting that the country will be able to stomach in the short term. A trojan horse to whet the country's appetite for additional visionary new ideas into the future of the sort. Yang's libertarian bent I think is the right fit for much of the current electorate's stage of development, whereas Bernie for whatever reason is very polarizing to that stubborn subset of the demographics required to win the presidency.

[Leo Gura]

@montecristo Yang's UBI will actually turn into a net-win for Republicans. Yang will reduce welfare programs to fund his UBI, then when the Republicans come back into power years later they will just end the UBI and the welfare programs would already be crippled. Thus creating big step back.

One of the key problems with UBI is that it's so easy to end it. What's necessary is to build deep-rooted infrastructure and systems which cannot be cut easily in the future, like Medicare and Social Security.

Unfortunately the UBI has no infrastructure behind it, making it weak to cutting.

[beaucoup]

 

Quote

He wants to fund UBI through VAT taxes, which is a bad idea in my opinion because it is a tax on the poor not the rich.

I'm not into american politics but i dont think this is true. What is taxed by funding a UBI through VAT is basically consumption. The more you consume, the more taxes you pay. The genius thing about this system is that it recognizes one seldomly understood thing about money: that money has no value, if it is not spended. Which is why i think it's much smarter to tax consumption than to tax income or profits - because as i said: money has no inherent value when it is not exchanged for other usable goods. 

 

Ideally i would even go so far and say it would be the best option to only have a VAT, and no other tax. Might seem radical, but think it thorugh. Also this VAT would probably have to be much higher than 10%, coming close to 50% i guess - which wouldnt make prices higher though, because all other taxes which are currently payed and therefore make prices higher already, would be eliminated. Very difficult subject to describe in a few words, but here in germany there are some very smart yellow-typish thinkers on the subject of UBI. Learning about UBI changed my whole understanding of economics.  

[Leo Gura]

Taxing consumption is terrible because most wealth is never consumed, it sits in bank accounts, while poor people get taxed.

We need to specifically tax wealth so it does not accumluate at the top.

[beaucoup]

Quote

Taxing consumption is terrible because most wealth is never consumed, it sits in bank accounts, while poor people get taxed.

Thats true, but the wealth that is not being consumed or spent really has no value. Thinking it does is one major misunderstanding about money and wealth. Imagine you have 10 million in your bank account: what good will they do you if you never spend em? 

 

[R-Type]

If done right the idea to tax consumption makes more sense than taxing work/income. The 'trick' of hoarding money in foreign countries or using other tax saving tricks evaporates, wealthy people will automatically pay their taxes as they usually consume more, unless they want to start all over and leave the country. That said, there have to be different taxation on goods for daily needs and luxurious goods/services. Also, not taxing income can result in higher motivation for work and wealth creation among the working class. 

[CreamCat]

On 6/14/2019 at 5:17 AM, Leo Gura said:

His UBI also goes to rich people who don't need it at all and it counts against other government benefits like social security and food stamps.

• If it doesn't go to the rich, it is not UBI.
• Food stamps are not optimal in the long term. It's good to make plans to cut it out in the future.
• The conditional parts of social security are humiliating and time-consuming and directly cause countless hours of bullshit work. Once UBI comes into place and becomes stable, people will stop using the conditional parts like TANF which will be cut down naturally because they are not used.
  • Personally, I wouldn't get near things like TANF.
  • I expect that even if Yang doesn't actively cut down conditional programs, they will be cut down gradually over time. They will be obliterated in a few decades once UBI proves to be stable.

Edited June 15, 2019 by CreamCat

[Revolutionary Think]

I like this Seth Underwood guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU9eHsCWGIo