The Basic Income idea

The luddites on the internet talking about it are retarded and miss the point of it.

Basic income is an idea that came from I believe various Green parties(I may be wrong), which wanted to differentiate themselves from "ordinary" socialists. Then they've started going full retard with it but that's beyond the point.

Green parties at first had lots of fresh ideas(nowadays they're basically "Make White Countries Brown: The Parties", but back then the movement was fresh and wrongthinkers were allowed) and one of them was their idea of salvaging welfare states in 1970's Europe.

The thought process went like - people like welfare for obvious reasons but the administrative burden caused by it leads to gigantic waste of money on every single level. Acknowledging the conservative/market liberal notion that excessive welfare discourages people from looking for work(legally) they've figured out the solution:
>pile all the welfare money in a single institution
>divide it by population number
>give everybody their share

They wouldn't get as much money as some guy who gets welfare for 12 different things does, but it still gives you ability to lead some kind of existence(it will be shit but you won't die from starvation) until you find a new job or other source of income. It also helps the poor people(the less you earn the bigger part of your wage your "share" is) and encourage having kids and family(more kids = more "shares"). At the same time money given back to the population would be very similar to the welfare budget, since the process is incredibly simple - are you citizen? Yes. You get the share. There's very little administrative work needed(especially nowadays, as you can make it all automatic), so little of that money is lost in the process of giving it. Meanwhile it fits "socialist" agenda regardless of tax system - even with flat tax, the rich individuals will pay more than the poor, while getting the same UBI.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=RCxgqHqakXc
youtube.com/watch?v=XXCzeouz4DQ&t
youtube.com/watch?v=50m6b8jDKaY&t
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

The thing is, nowadays people are trying to calculate how much would you have to raise the taxes to allow every American rent a flat in San Francisco and eat out 7 days a week, without removing existing welfare. Now of course in that case it's gonna be super fucking expensive thing, but as it was back when somebody came up with the idea the whole deal was that the budget would be unchanged, it's just that it would be divided in such simple way that there would be lots of money to be saved on administration.

I'm posting it because whenever I see somebody starting the thread about it I see this as a way to counter automation yadda yadda - it just won't work like this or will be super-expensive.

It will be the only thing that stops another French Revolution though. The jobs are going bye bye and without a plan in place to take care of people things will get ugly quick.

lots of evil rightwing nazi thinkers have advocated for a UBI; see milton friedman for instance

> inb4 kike shill

Only poorfags support the idea of a universal basic income

Better idea: Stop thinking a boss will pay you fairly and become an entrepreneur.

One form of UBI can be linked back to WWI and the work of C. H. Douglas.
It was called social credit.

The key point is that a UBI or Social Credit isn't a form of social assistance or wage augmentation for the poor.

It is monetary policy and deals with how and when money is created and how it is distributed into the economy.

Yeah, also neoreactionaries dark-enlightenment fag do.

It kinda is somewhere on the fringe, I'm just saying that I think that greens came up with it. It kinda makes sense that mainstream parties don't really like it since it means that their friend's friends who got cushy job as some pencil pushers in welfare-related administration are going to lose a job, but you get the point.

As I've said, I might be wrong about who came up with it. The point of it is the mentality behind it, it's not an "allow everybody to be NEET" scheme.

How about you leave your filthy hands off my money? You lazy no good control freaks like to create big piles of money you didn't earn so nobody will notice you taking a piece for yourself.

And if I could run a UBI without taxes would you allow me to replace the monetary policy of all money is bank debt with all money is debt free?

I don't know too much about this topic, but wouldn't a UBI the only way for people to survive when automization is moving on?

Where did I say I support it or want to convince everybody to support it? I'd take it over traditional welfare, obviously.

I've made this thread because I'm tired of reading luddite posts about how it's gonna bring the new age of NEETs.
Short answer no.

Long answer - automation isn't a problem. We can't expand anywhere anymore which is why people are afraid of automation. Even if it brought one or two new industries or sectors of economy it endangers so many jobs that people are extremely scared of it, however it also brings you one promise - it will help a fucking lot with terraforming, space travel and colonization which will bring the room to expand and consequently remove the problems people are concerned about.

>I'd take it over traditional welfare, obviously.
Should've said "that's all" instead of "obviously".

basic income is a scam
-jews want to give money to stupid people to let them buy more shit
-inflation or debt (and taxes as a result) (productivity will decrease) will harm saving of middle class around the world.
-companies that produce shit belong to jews
-niggers will be forced to fight with middle class. they will have antagonism.
-jews will hide to count profit

Not the only way but it is a very good way and can leave most of the economy private.

My implied alternatives is to make industry public / private and extract some of the dividends to be turned over to the public.

I like social credit which is a form of UBI.

Take every company and have the record their sales call this A. Then take all of the money they directly pay to people, either as wages, dividends or other compensation. Call that B.

A-B = a number greater than 0 or else the company will go bankrupt.

However if all A is in the end paid for by B then how can you have a positive number? You can't so people take loans.

A-B=C and C equal the exact amount of money that needs to be created for inflation free money, and no need for debt.

As automation goes up and less people are employed and less wages are paid, C becomes larger.

If we find a need for lots of manpower and B goes up then C is reduced.

This works and can scale up and down from full automation to no automation. While giving people the purchasing power needed to consume goods at any balance point.

If you pay for a UBI with taxes you are doing it wrong.

Bring back the work houses or poor farms of 100 years ago.

you can pay either with TAXES (or tarrifs) or from DEBTS

as a result basic income perverts demand and destroys market, because stupid people have money to buy shitty useless goods and services from jews.

it destroys productivity and perverts market. it is a first step to totalitarianism

conservative person will not buy useless goods or services and will save more. jews have conservative people.

jews hate* typo

Can't wait to watch robots and autonomous quadcopters gunning rioters down in the streets when all the Walmart employees lose their jobs
>tfw all your potential career paths are safe from automation in the foreseeable future

Companies also sell to each other? So A can be quite a lot higher than B...

I've only seen poorfags argue against it.
People who are not wellfare poor but owning ikea furniture, eating frozen pizza and wearing non tailor made clothing poor.
Really wealthy people are all for it.

Isn't the first part of your post the reason why inflation is neccessary is our monetarian system to keep things running?

>you can pay either with TAXES (or tarrifs) or from DEBTS
You can but that's like saying you can do dental work with a pistol. Yeah sure it works but it's a terrible way to do it.

Saying that everyone gets $10 but you tax someone $25 is pointless. Just tax them $15.

Doing it with debt work in a manner if you have no intention of ever paying the money back.
When a nation goes into debt to fund services how can new borrowed money allow the economy to support that increased spending if it wasn't able to support it? Or it's clearly within the ability of the economy to support that level of spending so why are you set on borrowing the money from banks, you are creating new money so why not just create new money?


>as a result basic income perverts demand and destroys market, because stupid people have money to buy shitty useless goods and services from jews.
People consume goods and services. So long as people want (will buy it) then it's generally a reasonable and valued good/service even if you might personally think it is stupid.

*Neccessary in

So you pay it with what? By printing Money?

That would destroy the incentive to save because of inflation, specially if productivity drops due to some lazy fucks deciding not to work.

This is bullshit talk because in germany for example wellfare handouts and all associated costs (wellfare/ job centers, heating, water, clerks, coffee, power bill) and pensions already eat up more money than ubi would cost.
People are ignorant to the fact that employing hundereds of thousands of beurocrats and having them sit in thousands of uniform concrete bunkers and drink coffee, turn on the heater all day while sleeping at the desk is far more costly than ubi.

There is another thing i wonder:
Wouldn't all this basically work best if the entire planet would do it the same way? UBI could lead to hyperinflation if I got that right, so the currency is weakend compared to others if there is only one currency system paying UBI and others are not?

No, no, no. No. No.
You people get it all wrong.
You see we have printers(FED and ECB) printing trillion every year. It's for the economy or whatever, some knowledgeable in finance would agree that we're printing the plutocrats out of 700 trillion of debt they created, but that's another story and not for everyone.

The Basic Income could be another level of humanity, because this one is finished and makes no sense. Also an increasing majority of red-pilled folk knows how things are functioning and doesn't want to partake in this chicken farm.

I for one am looking in all alternative ways to not spend my time partaking in this fraud and spend all the time making ends meet just to get by.
Cause in the end is all about time, you have this 50-60-80-100? years on this planet to make some experience/learning and what we do?
youtube.com/watch?v=RCxgqHqakXc

>Companies also sell to each other? So A can be quite a lot higher than B...

So you have one company that buys from another company. Then sells to another. This chain keeps going. But if they only sell to other companies then how is the population of people being supported by goods and services?

The calculation works for people.

If we had a full automated AI run economy all the inter business sales between them are a closed system.

It's only when one company wants to sell to people goods and services that people want do you need to create new currency to allow an economy to sustain the population.

When the People Needs Company makes a sale to humans then you need to do A-B=C.

So PNC has
A of 100,000
B of 0
C of 100,000

You need to make 100,000 to allow the sales to be made otherwise people will slowly transfer all their money into the PNC company, and in time the PNC company will have no sales at all because no people have any money.

If the PNC was owned by a human and that human wanted profit or wages that would count towards B.

More or less. But we don't need to allow the banking industry to sit over everyone else simply because we allow all new money to come from them.

How about not printing any fucking money? (Or very little, tie it to a specific index of population)

What do you study/work btw?

people (if they are not incapable or old and retired) that do not produce anything should not consume.

elite is afraid that niggers arabs and liberals around the world will riot, so it wants to plunder middle class to use "excavated" capital to feed niggers around the world

they created scam that is called basic income, welfare etc

people must be able to buy goods. not just want. other wise it is called communism or nazim or national communism or same shit. communists lured stupid people into their ideology by proposing them palaces and shit. after 10 years they imposed totalitarian rule,

I want to be Darth Vader. See. but i cant get what i want just by saying it, so i need to do stuff that will bring my glory and shit to his level, such way civilization is created

basic income perverts demand and created inflation to plunder and ruin everything later.

>So you pay it with what? By printing Money?
>That would destroy the incentive to save because of inflation, specially if productivity drops due to some lazy fucks deciding not to work.

No it's a non inflationary monetary policy. Money is only created when it is needed to balance the gap between sales to people and money paid to people.

The value doesn't change.

If you wanted to put an incentive you could offer a negative sales tax to stores that hold their prices. It is not required because the money created is in balance with the demands and supply of the economy not the desires of banks to manipulate the economy.

If you are content as living like a serf under rulers of your land thst get passed down by birthright

pls gib ubi now mr jew.

How about talking about the big elephant in the room here.

UBI would destroy the family unit even more than welfare does.

Why should Tanisha and Mary stick with their partners, when they can easily get cock from other men and be able to support their basic needs even if they fuck everything up in their lives?

Same with Tyrone and Brian, why would they stick and form a family? They could just go about impregnating as many women they can throughout their lives without having to worry about supporting and raising their offspring.

Euthanasia would be cheaper and more efficient or "green" if you will.

germans will never do basic income because it will damage inflation and their productivity, they will lose expot lol.

they would rather import more refugees and take away money andcapital from natives so they cant breed

No inflation/deflation of money. New money is only created in relation to what is needed not more not less.

The exchange between different national currency will still float. As one nation (N1) buys the goods of another(N2) that selling(N2) nation now has money to buy goods from the first nation(N1). If they (N2) don't want any of that nation's(N1) goods then the value the second(N2) nation will accept for the first nation(N1) money drops.

In the end the goal of this economy isn't to export lots of goods to get money. It's to reach a balance of trade. If you sell more goods and import money then all you are doing is exporting your goods, material, labor for money you have no use for. (if you had a use for it then you wouldn't have more exports than imports)

>What do you study/work btw?
Power Engineer.

Yeah, I'm convinced it is the preferable alternative to a welfare system with all the bureaucracy and disincentive. People will want to work hard to make even more money yet if they fall on hard times they won't starve, and we don't have to pay for worthless government workers (niggers and feminists) and their cushy pensions etc. It is actually a great stealth idea to destroy the welfare state.

green?

They already do that.
Thats not an argument but a little fantasy of yours.

>people (if they are not incapable or old and retired) that do not produce anything should not consume.
If someone doesn't consume they will die of dehydration within about 3 days, starvation with about 30.

We create more than enough to care for people unable to work. Also during people's working lives if they can save enough to keep living after why shouldn't the be allowed to consume so long as they have money to buy things with?

>basic income perverts demand and created inflation to plunder and ruin everything later.
Only if you do it in the worst way possible.

>It is actually a great stealth idea to destroy the welfare state.
This.
Another benefit is that importing third worlders to undercut wages and pressure natives wont work anymore.

Why do you have such a deep knowledge in this topic? Self study?

Im poor and im against basic income because it will make me even more poor.When my money from my job will be distributed for lazy people.

Natural gas turbine with a HRSG.

My dream is to work in a LFTR that runs a hot air turbine with a HRSG.

Especially germany will collapse in the next 20 years without ubi.

UBI can be funded either from debts or from taxes or from redistribution (from taxes)

there are no other sources.

lets speak with equations if you disagree, write formula (for budget) how you will pay basic income and from what sources.

then he must die

goal is not to create buy to get profit and save capital.

if you pervert demand with debt, manipulations with currency and kill profit and accumulation motivation, then say HELLO to beats from the past.

if you goods have no demand you must close.

better 1 person dies than 1000000000

>Why do you have such a deep knowledge in this topic? Self study?

Never took economics in school. But I have read lots and my family is a mix of engineers, programmers, small business owners, senior government employees...

When I talk to my family about economics I get to talk at all levels from the most senior of government bureaucrats, to small business owners.

I have been thinking about building a computer program that would simulate an economy, allowing you to simulate not model the movement of money and let the player/user make changes to monetary and fiscal policy and see what happens.

The real answer is that I spent a very long time thinking about the economics of MMORPGs and from that came to conclusions which I then found had been discovered 90 years ago.

The story of C. H. Douglas is very interesting. I'd recommend reading his papers and books. Also a few times Robert Heinlein hit on the issue of monetary policy in his books.

they will collapse in both cases

with UBI EU will live longer in expence of europeans

germans plundered EU, jews may plunder germany with UBI

EU will collapse (even with UBI), better not to plunder germans and let EU to collapse faster

>I've only seen poorfags argue against it.
>People who are not wellfare poor but owning ikea furniture, eating frozen pizza and wearing non tailor made clothing poor.
i.e., the middle class
>Really wealthy people are all for it.
That's because the middle class pay most taxes.
The upper class are all for it because they anticipate dodging the confiscatory tax policy UBI is built on, and they like the idea of holding down the middle class with that tax burden to prevent upstarts from challenging them.
So you have the people who will be most harmed by UBI arguing against it, and the people who will benefit most from it, the lazy and the ultra wealthy, arguing on its behalf.
That's predictable.

Nice! Do you have any other literature that fits topics like these?

America's system of welfare is already unsustainable
It keeps growing each year exponentially
the welfare bubble is going to pop someday and shit will hit the fan like no one has seen before.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

>UBI can be funded either from debts or from taxes or from redistribution (from taxes)
>there are no other sources.
Government owns a profitable business, they return that profit directly to the people as a national dividend. UBI not paid by debt or taxes.

>lets speak with equations if you disagree, write formula (for budget) how you will pay basic income and from what sources.
A-B=C

Let A equal all sales made to humans within the nation.
Let B equal all transfers of money to humans from businesses.
C is the exact amount of new money within a period of time that must be created to hold the value of a currency.

This A-B=C isn't for each company but for the whole economy. So a company that only sells to other companies has an A value of 0 but will have a positive B value.

This system replaces all other monetary policy including bank created currency. The treasury/central bank will no longer create money on demand for banks and will not be a lender to banks. Banks can no longer engage in fractional reserve banking counting borrowed money deposited with them as new money they can loan.

>Nice! Do you have any other literature that fits topics like these?

The internet is a big place. I'd read, watch listen to everything on monetary policy.

Here watch these two videos from Brother Nathanael. Just aside his crazy and listen to him.

youtube.com/watch?v=XXCzeouz4DQ&t
youtube.com/watch?v=50m6b8jDKaY&t

>That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
What's your monetary policy?

You are forgetting everyone on Sup Forums is senior engineer vital for company who surely won't be affected by automation.
Right?

US spends around 800bil on welfare, population is about 320mil.
That's ~$200 a month per person. Cheapest rent I've ever had was sharing a house with 6 other people for $250 a month

The system would grind to a halt practically overnight under a regime like that. What you've go there is a basket of totally naive assumptions built on static variables that IRL are dynamic.
>Let A equal all sales made to humans within the nation.
No one knows what that is until the dust clears, which means that to make your system work, an unknowledgeable bureaucrat would have to make up a number off the top of his head to go by, and that kind of central planning fails, command economies are ruinous and deadly to everyone involved.

Gold standard.

Thanks!

your equations are wrong, lets open wikipedia

MV = PQ

taxes and tarrifs + debt + sold assets - expenses - % + emitted money*m = 0

personal income = salary + rent,% + business + GIBS

GIBS = OLD GIBS + basic income

explain where do you wnat to take money? what do you wnat to redistribute?

>The system would grind to a halt practically overnight under a regime like that. What you've go there is a basket of totally naive assumptions built on static variables that IRL are dynamic.

What static variables do you think I've listed and what ones do you think are dynamic exactly?
>>Let A equal all sales made to humans within the nation.
>No one knows what that is until the dust clears
No every business that has retail sales knows that exact number because of sales tax. If you live in a nation with national sales tax literally every sale that is made to consumers is tracked so that taxes are only paid by people not companies.

Also every business does bookkeeping so they all know that exact figure.

>which means that to make your system work,
But given that you are wrong this point is based on a false pretense and so is also wrong.

>an unknowledgeable bureaucrat would have to make up a number off the top of his head to go by, and that kind of central planning fails, command economies are ruinous and deadly to everyone involved.
Strawmaning like the best of them.

>Gold standard.
So rampant deflation and huge amounts of time and effort wasted on mining gold that is never used for anything.
If you push the value of gold high enough then all sorts of crazy means of getting gold become viable.

one more , forgot.

GDP = government spendings + consumption + investments + net export.

use proven and well known shit.

>have UBI
>where does the money for UBI come from?
>taxes
>we pay another tax to just get that money back
What? This just means there'll be less people working so the tax burden increases for the rest of us. We already have unemployment benefits/welfare, who was the retard that thought this was a good idea?

>your equations are wrong,
What is wrong?

>explain where do you wnat to take money? what do you wnat to redistribute?
Nothing is taken, nothing is redistributed.
Currency is created but only as demanded by the difference between sales and income.

What does GDP have to do with anything?
You might as well include the amount of energy needed to boil water at 1MPa and 120C to 100% steam for all it matters.

NO PROOFS, so they are wrong.
use proven equation to explain source of money

MV = PQ

taxes and tarrifs + debt + sold assets - expenses - % + emitted money*m = 0

personal income = salary + rent,% + business + GIBS

personal income = savings + consumption

GDP = government spendings + consumption + investments + net export.

now explain

basic income = ??????

Money supply has to be dynamic or the system breaks down. Don't you know anything about economies? Depressions can be caused by inflexibility of money supply, that's how the Great Depression got going in the 1930's. Your C figure is static, and the only determiner of it is an implied omniscient bureaucracy handing down a magic figure of how much currency is necessary without a workable mechanism to calculate that figure, like a market based metric.
>rampant deflation and huge amounts of time and effort wasted on mining gold that is never used for anything
Gold has many uses independent of its use as a currency and store of value, including artwork, jewelry, medical uses, electronics, industry, etc.
Gold standard is proven to be the best way to maintain a sound financial system, that's exactly why the first thing the kikes will do when they corrupt your system is jew it away from you. The popular use of the term gold standard as the best example of a thing came about for a reason, you know, and not by accident.

The source of money is MB.

MB would only be created by a function of the A-B=C formula.
The commercial bank money would be eliminated, in that commercial banks wouldn't be able to create any new money.

Your copy pasta means nothing. Thanks for telling everyone you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

OK, so what happens to a people who need huge amounts of government support (due to some medical condition, for example) after you "take down the welfare system"?

>Money supply has to be dynamic or the system breaks down. Don't you know anything about economies? Depressions can be caused by inflexibility of money supply, that's how the Great Depression got going in the 1930's. Your C figure is static, and the only determiner of it is an implied omniscient bureaucracy handing down a magic figure of how much currency is necessary without a workable mechanism to calculate that figure, like a market based metric.

C is not static. It's totally dynamic based off of the sales made, and 'wages' paid.
If people don't buy as much the value of C changes, if fewer people are paid or get paid more or less C changes.

>Gold has many uses independent of its use as a currency and store of value, including artwork, jewelry, medical uses, electronics, industry, etc.
None of which would be economically possible by gold that's head in reserve for money.

You can't use reserve gold for anything at all. It must by definition sit in storage.

>Gold standard is proven to be the best way to maintain a sound financial system.
Not with the level of growth and expansion possible with modern automation and productivity. You would almost instantly create a massive deflationary system as the amount of gold produced, can be produced is far lower than economic growth.

Right up till someone starts mining an asteroid and wants to import a few billion tons of gold. Then you get massive inflation.

so source of basic income

basic income = ??????

i ask you to write formula for basic income using common knowledge and proven equations.

We get it, you took an intro to economics class.

Nothing you are writing relates to anything.

I don't think people realize the payment goes to everyone, from the richest person in the country to the most destitute.

How do you pay for it ?
Loans? Taxes? Print money?
All of these bring unnecessary disadvantages and ruin the country each in their own way. Loans cause more borrowing and more inflation due to interest.
Taxes drive up the cost to create goods and drive away business or reduce incentive to start a business due to higher start up costs and running costs.
And printing money is literally how to cause hyper-inflation 101.

>so source of basic income
>basic income = ??????
>i ask you to write formula for basic income using common knowledge and proven equations.

I've answered that question many times.
Basic income = Only new MB.

New MB is governed by the formula.

Basic Income is the Monetary Policy.

It would that on an even bigger scale hence why i say more than welfare does.

And how come it's not an argument? This is a perfectly valid concern against welfare or UBI as they tend to promote the disintegration of the family unit.

>How do you pay for it ?
>Loans? Taxes? Print money?
By switching the monetary policy from all money is bank debt, to all money is debt free and created only as required.

That's one way.

Another way is to have the government operate for profit business and pass the profits onto the people as dividends. That's just a suggestion. I want monetary reform, but their are many ways to pay for a UBI.

>We get it, you took an intro to economics class.
I think he just copied the wiki page. I mean he literally said that he did.

i work in holding in finaces and also i create financial it systems for holding where i work.

owner is jew, i am not even joking.
your are not engineer because your level of math is shit

turbine will explode lol and people will die. you need to kill yourself

you cant even use common well-known parameters to explain your thoughts

i ask you to describe that source of basic income, you cant do it lol.

proxy communist detected lol

So money is created and destroyed as need be ?
No one can understand what you are saying because it does not make ANY sense.
C = A + B or whatever is not monetary policy.

Is that the best you have?

The quality of shit posting has dropped.

> Give people with non-existent money management skills (niggers) a wad of cash not earmarked for any specific purpose every month
> Spends it all on shoes and blunts
> Can't buy food or pay rent now

You think we're gonna let these niggers starve to death? Of course not, so we'll still have food stamps and section 8 for niggers who can't manage money (all of them).

There is absolutely no way UBI will save money over welfare unless society is willing to let people die for lack of money.

This makes more sense but ubi as a whole is a shit tier idea. There is no way someone in San Francisco can live on the same ubi as Sterling, CO. No matter how you break it down some people will be getting more than others further squeezing the middle class

summerfag detected, I am now dumber for having read through your atrocious attempt at defending your points

i am out, waste of time.

you can continue to copypast propaganda to undermine your class enemies lol

>So money is created and destroyed as need be ?
Yes, but not destroyed. It would just sit as a negative against future creation.

About the only way you would get a negative number is if you had a huge imbalance of trade and exported massively more than you imported.

>No one can understand what you are saying because it does not make ANY sense.
What do you not understand exactly?

Keep looking for that shift key.

...

>It kinda makes sense that mainstream parties don't really like it since it means that their friend's friends who got cushy job as some pencil pushers in welfare-related administration are going to lose a job

Another good point. Im not saying ubi is a dead end i just think the idea in general is impractical and unreliable. You can't fix stupid and politics will always stand in the way of coming up with reforms that threaten government jobs

that's a lot of legos

When we create true AI the time is right for UBI, until then we need humans to do shitty fucking jobs.

If you hand out UBI which allows you to live comfortably doing fuck all, the people doing shitty fucking jobs will want huge pay raises. This is not affordable.

That's why for the moment workfare makes more sense, create jobs which are uneconomic (picking up trash, etc) but which are shitty enough they don't compete with free market shitty jobs and you don't have to suddenly start paying them massive salaries.

As long as white genocide is in full effect it's all just theorizing any way. Whites have to work to pay for darkie welfare ... no shortage of jobs for the moment for the people willing and able to work.

assuming Tyrone and Tanisha are rational actors in this model. They will have unsustainable birthrates regardless. We need to offer affirmative-action-abortion. Minorities get to the frunt of the line when it comes to "reproductive health".

Negative money ? So Debt.
So now you are saying you get debt by being an export nation. Great plan really encouraging people to expand overseas business.

I can't understand anything. You are advocating for total monetary reform but not explaining EXACTLY how it will happen. I need absolutely every single detail. Or have you just thought about it for 10 mins and think this makes me feel good. This policy do far from what i have seen will destroy industry and investment in your country.

Is it communism you want ? We know how that went.