Would subsidizing basic necessities be preferable to "universal basic income"?

would subsidizing basic necessities be preferable to "universal basic income"?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/IKdwhnXpOQ4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

sterilization of lowlifes is the best solution next to killing them outright.

Ask Zimbabwe.

>basic

also
>healthy food

do you agree or disagree?

what a great thread.

Yes.
The poor shouldn't be able to vote with dollars. Poor shouldn't go hungry or homeless, but should definitely not be acting as part of the decision feedback process to producers.

Could it be a more obvious star of david?

VOA = Victory Over Anarchy / Voice of Anonymous

These are both terrible choices. If you reward failure and poverty you just get more of it. End all welfare now.

Of course it would.

Why did they go out of their way to specify free food and water? Why not just make everything else free while they are at it?

Stop shilling your gay cult here Chris.

Naturally, except they are not representative of the idea as they break every rule in the creed.

Why does food and water have to be healthy, but clothing has to be "basic"? Why not fashionable clothing?

they call that "soaking the poor", which creates the dependency you're talking about.
if you eliminate poverty, you'll increase the working class's purchasing power, driving the economy to new heights.
ending welfare will not force others to be responsible. you expect too much out of humans.

lol, i'm not Chris. it would be cool if he posted here, though.

with their liberated incomes, they'll be able to buy all the stupid clothes they want.

paging Christopher Nemelka. paging Christopher Nemelka.

these fags use blurry word such as "basic" intentionally so they can interpret it away to mean whatever the fuck they want

over there at burgerland niggers were using food stamps to buy lobster, and the democrats defended it

yes, you can give basic income but many people will waste that money. Provide free fresh food (nothing processed), free healthcare, schooling, housing. Even free electricity would reduce electricity consumption if done right. If you want more than basic fresh food you can work for it. If you want better than the free basic healthcare then get private healthcare, if you want more than the small free housing provided then buy a bigger house. If you want to sit on your ass all day in your freely provided house, eating your free produce without a care for anything but the having the essentials for life then go your hardest.
We will always need capitalism as humans just won't strive to achieve with the incentive.
If you provide the basics i believe you would see improved health and well being, improved productivity among those who do strive for more.
Just make corporations pay for it all. Tax them. If they provided a service and make billions just take half. if they do not like it then they have a choice, shut up shop and let someone else who is happy to move in and provide the service for half the profit.

>ending welfare will not force others to be responsible
it would put them in a "be responsible or die" situation, evolution takes care of the rest

>using food stamps to buy lobster
what's wrong with lobster? you'd prefer people eat tv dinners and develop chronic disease?

Hey Chris, did you think about my offer of teaching you how to Sup Forums if you teach me how to pick up chicks?

>Even free electricity would reduce electricity consumption if done right.
EVERYONE POINT AT HIM AND LAUGH

idiots would use that "free electricity" to mine bitcoin or whatever

lol, i'm NOT chris. but i remember you saying that!

Oh good I was wondering if you had forgotten, it was a long time ago after all. You might also have posted here and I didn't notice, can't be here all time you know
But please pass the offer on to Chris, pretty please

i remember Chris saying that if you want a woman to fall in love with you, be nice.

This guy gets it. The main human impulse is to be better than your neighbor but the enormous stress of merely living day to day curbs any imagination, any entrepreneurial spirit because if you fail even once you'll be in the streets.

That being said I wouldn't support any such program if it didn't come with additional regulations concerning human population, hard caps, forced abortions, eugenics, etc.

i said if done right you dopey uneducated wop.

If you were to provide the first 10kw/h a day for free and if you go over it then you pay say $1 a kw/h then what do you think people will do?

>That being said I wouldn't support any such program if it didn't come with additional regulations concerning human population, hard caps, forced abortions, eugenics, etc
im good with all that

Those would be effectively the same thing.

All commies will hang. Especially commies too retarded to realize they're fucking commies.

Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.

Give them nothing and make it known that demanding more in exchange for nothing will be punished severely.

>The main human impulse is to be better than your neighbor
This is why communism fails every single time. Instead of accepting true human nature you believe humans are what you want them to be like.
Most people are lazy fucks. They only put any effort on anything it they know they would be fucked if they don't.
That's how the Soviet Union went form "workers paradise" to "obey or gulag" before the paradise even happened.

Only if in exchange people who accepted were sterilized.

Lobster is that weird case where it was only eaten because you were absolutely poor as fuck, to a luxury item because it's so hard to fish for mass quantities of the damn hardshells.

Bonus points for really large lobster. Lobsters supposedly live forever and grow forever so long as they live. Imagine a nigger eating a lobster that was born lived around the Civil War Era. All that time, all that struggle, only to end up in smacking lips that can't stop vocalizing ebonics.

Lobster is a luxury food now. Not the most nutritious but certainly one of the more expensive ways to eat. People don't really like seeing handouts going towards luxury food when they're eating rice and beans.

Makes people believe in GAS THE KIKES RACEWAR NOW a little too much.

Actually that sounds like a splendid idea. Let's subsidize the fanciest food for the trashiest people. Let the rage and seething build up pressure and let it explode.

It sounds nice in theory, but to put it to practice you would need to allocate an enormous amount of executive power into the hands of an unelected bureaucracy so they can divvy up and distribute all that fresh food and water, administer all that free housing and healthcare etc.

This brings us to a two pronged problem:
1) people are assholes and most will steal from this "common pool" of resources if they can - over time the poor will still be poor, while the bureaucrats responsible for the division of resources will grow wealthy without deserving that wealth
2) you handed over a lot of power to these bureaucrats and they WILL want to maintain a system that "rewards" them for doing fuck all and making everything worse, thus they will exercise that power to introduce tyranny to prevent getting toppled from power (because as we ascertained in point 1 - people are assholes)

tl;dr gommunism doesn't work, it never did and it never will

>i said if done right you dopey uneducated wop.
Riiiiiight, done in you perfect, infallible, unique, different to any other attempts way.

You are so extremely turbo idiotic and then call me "ignorant", lel, you should know that such things have been tried before, and the result was predictably, collapse because the government runs out of other people's money.

Oh, wait, I forgot, they just didn't do it "right", ok mate, just try again :^)

>symbolism of thelema
as always, masons/satanists/jews at play

I thought my freak ear was big, but holy shit. Can he hear the hand rubbing from five miles away?

good job on increasing the criminality tenfold

everything is open to abuse, we can only devise a way/systems that limits the abuse.

With the fresh food, I would utilize the current distribution system of supermarkets. Obviously government would pay for the food but with that kind of buying power would be able to negotiate reasonable prices with the retailer and Obviously limits would have to be placed. A card linked to an individual(family) that monitors and restricts excessive purchases?

>On the fifth day of Sup Forumsmas a Sup Forumsack gave to me
>Five Commies Dead
>checked

Listen to 01-01 here. There is no right way to a free lunch. If it can be abused it will be abused.

those are superior slav genetics at hand my dear americunt

>THumP

To be honest I'd prefer getting a basic yearly income instead of everything else being socialized. Take all the money out of government programs and just give it straight to the people. Then at least people will have a choice in how they spend their money, which will breed capitalistic competition. That being said, it won't just happen like that. You think the government is competent enough for this?

Educate yourself child that's a thelemite symbol. Related but usually the Vs are don't so it doesn't form a perfect Star of David. It's a hermetic symbol showing male/female, birth and death, above and below, micro and macro. Curious why someone would use it in this context

so what you are telling me is if you were offered an amount of electricity for free (enough to run your house if you are conservative) and if you go over that amount you are charged through the roof you would not adjust your electricity usage to ensure you do not have to pay?

And give up the right to vote.

It's only superior if bigger ears hear better.

What can superslav ears hear best?

Another issue I haven't mentioned in my previous post is that, while your idea is emphatic and would make a lot of people "better off" in the short term, it would also make them mostly or totally dependent on the state for the fulfillment of their basic needs - thus they would HAVE to accept anything the state does (even if it infringes on their freedoms and/or human rights) because the alternative would be starvation, homelessness etc.

Your system hinges on the premise that only benevolent paragons of virtue ever take political power - because if anything other than that happened, the system would degenerate into a totalitarian nightmare very quickly. It could maybe, possibly (though highly unlikely) work if power was granted to an artificial intelligence, but a polity of humans ruled by an AI would not be considered legitimate by other polities and most probably by a majority of humans in said polity as well.

>criminality
just recognize the citizens's right to defend themselves

Sup Forums's full of faggots who love to LARP as if they are evil billionaires like george soros.
At the most, they're evil thousandaires and will be culled with the rest of the human garbage on judgment day.

>kill criminals
Problem solved

capitalism is being abused what is your point?
we will never stop abuse of any system but we could make a system that supports the people who live within that system not just those at the top?

what about free Iphones and free starbucks?

This is the cringiest thing I've seen in a very long time.

In what way, what does that even mean? You go to a supermarket and the bread just costs 1 cent or some bollocks?

And what a fucking Western eccentric, urban centric pile of trash rights.

James from Australia your on the line go ahead with your question or comment

Any system can be abused, but adding more stuff to abuse doesn't sound like a sound plan at all.

>tfw that video first showed up
Haven't laughed this hard since. Good times.

...

If we start handing out houses

>Guy Fawkes mask
C'mon they couldn't do Moonman?

long time listener first time caller, i just called to ask why Americans associate all and any socialist policies with the failed Russian communist model of socialism? Why do listeners believe a socialist/capitalist system would be open to anymore abuse that 100% capitalist/globalist system we are living in?

Personally, instead of either universal basic income or welfare, I'd try to do workfare schemes - you know, get the poor and unemployed and give them work experience in various fields depending on what particular project(s) the state is engaged in at the time, they'd HAVE to work and in exchange they'd get the equivalent of "welfare" or "UBI". Giving money away for free would just drive inflation up, but making the poor work for the state for that money not only gives them a sense of fulfillment (since they aren't sitting on their asses all day collecting welfare checks and watching bad reality TV), integration into society and socialization with others, work experience that would help them find a private sector job more easily as well as financing them without causing inflation (while also potentially driving down the cost of government - why have a bureaucrat who you pay 10k a month, when you can get a workfare temp and pay him 3k a month for the same job, at least until he gets enough experience to find a private sector job)

>enough to run your house if you are conservative
that is when the system starts to fail
you are make the assumption that the state would get this value right, so you introduce a potential point of failure

Hugo Chavez once told his people to use hand fans because of the power shortage (on the coountry with the largest oil reserves). Then told them to have one minute showers every few days.

Communism tends to failure because it introduces numerous points of failure and then just hopes for the best.

obviously that value would need to be researched and be somewhat liberal. It would have to be based on averages and be tied to how many individuals live in a particular property but it is very doable. Would also need a way for a person to measure their usage in real time but i believe there is already devices that do this.

The idea is that when a certain amount is free many people especially those on low income would be more mindfull of their electricty consumption and be more proactive in reducing usage. This could also push manufactures of electrical products to improve their efficiency and push more people who can afford it into reducing consumption with Solar power.

youtu.be/IKdwhnXpOQ4

>obviously that value would need to be researched and be somewhat liberal
>the solution to everything is add more liberal

>Solar power
ignorant brainlet detected
Didnt some part of your country have a power failure bacause of a solar farm recently?

you said that whe power value would have to be carefully determined, but as I said before, it is a potential point of failure, that would be compound with other points of failure from designing systems with that philosophy

then real communism happens

>then real communism happens
maybe in some south american back water. I am not suggesting state control of power supply. Just subsidized.When subsidizing that much power the government would have huge purchasing power and dictate a reasonable rate from the supplier.

And my solar suggestion was a way to REDUCE individual use of corporate provided electricity.
I get 10kw/h for free a day, i use 14kw/h a day and have to pay for 4kw/h, well if i install a solar system i now only use 8kw/h. get it yet?
And the power failure was due to the increased load on a power inter connector due to Chinese steel in transmission poles collapsing in high wind.

Exactly... basically everything that isn't subsidized becomes a commodity and the market for it takes a big hit. Seems like a surefire way to end up in a dystopian society where everything remotely nice is out of a majority of the peoples reaches. Not "soon" so to speak, but it could and probably would reach that point.

technology is going to make all of these things so cheap to produce that they will basically be free. the government needs to stay away.

>Just subsidized
with whose money?

>When subsidizing that much power the government would have huge purchasing power and dictate a reasonable rate from the supplier.
in socialist governments it is very common for officials to buy extra expensive and pocketing part of it, another point of failure

>maybe in some south american back water
> the power failure was due to the increased load on a power inter connector due to Chinese steel in transmission poles collapsing in high wind.

wow, 1st world countries are so much more advanced that they still build shitty infrastructure and then blame other countries