Universal income. Good or bad idea?

Universal income. Good or bad idea?

Other urls found in this thread:

medium.com/basic-income/wouldnt-unconditional-basic-income-just-cause-massive-inflation-fe71d69f15e7
imgur.com/a/OyOid
youtube.com/watch?v=oDkHLPanjkQ
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Hard working people make a nation great. Its only natural that hard working people get a higher reward.

sage

>Its only natural that hard working people get a higher reward.
That would still happen under universal income

Lazy medniggers

>working people get taxed 99% of what they earn
>more niggers flow in because leftists and parasites are too stupid that too few earning for too many will be inevitably unsustainable

>Not making the goyim slave daily for their own survival?

Basic income will only work with closed borders and a >95% white population.

Permanent welfare keeps people stuck in poverty in perpetuity. Why do you hate the poor so much?

>A TERRIBLE IDEA

Universal income only works in a homogenous society. Much like Democracy.

Daily reminder that the entire point of UBI and all welfare is to create inflation so banks can continue to give out shitty loans

It seems I misunderstood. However, giving useless niggers money without ever expecting something back will only work as long as the majority is white. And that is chancing, raptly. Useless niggers use their free money to reproduce faster than ever.

Ask not what your country can do for you (free universal income money); ask what you can do for your country (your fkn job).

>to create inflation
UBI would come from already existing money. There would be no inflation

medium.com/basic-income/wouldnt-unconditional-basic-income-just-cause-massive-inflation-fe71d69f15e7

Right now, no. But when/if the jobs that employ the majority white working class, eg trucking, construction, ports, maintenance etc. get robot-ized it will. Reason is nobody wants an army of pissed off white guys with skills on the rampage.

It certainly won't work right now. In the future when we're close to a post scarcity automated world, I think it's going to be necessary or some massive shift in our society works is.

I see very few compatriots have read pic related. Sad!

it would increase spending

Please explain to me why you think stealing is okay if you wouldn't want it to happen to you, because until I understand this I will not be able to understand UBI

It's fundamentally a good idea but it only works in homogeneous societies with a high level of trust.

UBT is fucking retarded and everyone deep down knows it. I'm a fairly hard-working guy making just under 6 figures, but if you told me I could get paid enough to live comfortably no matter what I did, I'd quit my job and just play video games all day.

Things that everyone get automatically for free have zero value. Non-physical things, even less.
Therefore, all this does is to turn money worthless.

I don't read Spanish, what does it say, what is the argument?

Is that a bad thing

sure if you're a globalist scumbag

The 'globalists' are against this

Not everyone is that modest though, most people want to afford luxuries, in particular to impress women who probably wouldn't impressed by a guy who spends all his time at home playing video games.

Gas all socialists

Maybe wait for a tiny country to successfully implement it before we try it on a larger country?

The problem with these kinds of handouts is that you eventually run out of other peoples money to give to people.

Basically this, it also makes you dependend on who promises the most gibst.

Good idea, I want to do nothing but play video games and lift weights and read books. Let the worker bees do their thing to keep me and the other NEETs afloat

The globalists will be put up against a wall and shot, screenshot this. It will happen.

Yes because it creates inflation

Worst idea ever

Did you miss your own flag on the graph?
Good Geralt pic though.

Also the argument that more welfare and UBI will reduce crime is equally retarded because any amount of discussion on that topic can be boiled down to
>if you don't give them free money they're going to rob you

>Maybe wait for a tiny country to successfully implement it before we try it on a larger country?
There have been several small experiments and all positive. None on a country wide scale though

>A program in Uganda randomly awarded an unsupervised grants of $382 to 535 young applicants aged 15–35. The results showed that "the program increases business assets by 57%, work hours by 17%, and earnings by 38%". In addition, many of those who participated in the project have also started their own enterprises, creating job opportunities for others.[16] In January 2017, another pilot study, designed for two years, was launched by the charitable organization Eight in an undisclosed village consisting of 50 households. The experiment, which is being recorded in a documentary, aims to evaluate the effects of basic income in four areas: education participation of girls and women, access to healthcare, engagement in democratic institutions and local economic development. The amount of income distributed to the village residents per month is $18.25 for adults and $9.13 for children.[17

Spending money does not create inflation

>Italy and Spain first in the OP post

Funny how they're the two most economically fucked up countries in Europe, really makes me think

Not necessarily. There are different models. You have the humanist perspective, usually held by the types of people that come from an anthroposophic direction who want to enable people to freely express themselves, but you also have a capitalist point of view, which argues that a modern society doesn't really have a lot of use for the working class any more, so in order to mobilise them as consumers they need handouts (which in turn is completely spent on consumer goods).

Traditionally minded leftists are usually vehemently opposed to the idea of basic income.

>"only" 58% of commie fucks in France

Weird.

very bad idea. you don't want masses of lazy people. you don't want to reinforce laziness, it would mean the end of civilization as we know it

>which argues that a modern society doesn't really have a lot of use for the working class any more, so in order to mobilise them as consumers they need handouts
I think this will become more and more relevant as automation continues

The only reason it makes sense to me is in the eventuality that most jobs are automated.

What will people do for money if most services and production in a society are being handled by machines? Who will buy those products and services?

>Spending money does not create inflation
Yes it does

it says "against basic income - why the redistribution of the income restricts our liberties and impoverish us all" and the quote below "because the basic thing is not the income, is the liberty"

the people didn't have much to do with it though ...

And this is why the US was the best country (even marxists said it), sad times.

Summarizing; Universal basic income equals society downwards.

That's where your wrong. In today's (well, more so past sociesties) women were extremely attracted by men with money for long-term stability. In today's welfare society and a UBT society, money is guerenteed by the government and women seek more in the moment traits like pure physical attractiveness, because they know the government will always be the backup to support any man she picks (and has kids with) whether or not he is a good long-term bet. In the past being a single mother was a near death sentence, since the Welfare state it's literally financially incentivised.

under a few conditions I would be ok with it:

-absolutely no open immigration.

-all other transfers ended (healthcare plans, welfare, unemployment, food stamps, housing)

-tax rates do not change dramatically

-ubi is only enough for basic housing, food, healthcare and education.

I already get SSI for my Anxiety, would this stack?

>-all other transfers ended (healthcare plans, welfare, unemployment, food stamps, housing)
This is the idea. One argument is that it will also save money getting rid of the huge amount of bureaucracy needed for these programmes by moving it all into one payment

only is spending increases faster than productivity

How much does that pay? I have a part time job at 15 hours per week paying $25/hour, so since I’m not full time, I’m trying to explore what government benefits I can abuse to improve my NEET life. It could be an excellent set-up with minimal work involved but still decent money/gibs

Why dont we just get rid of the welfare state completely?

...

These

This applies to pretty much any socio-economic concept

Unless you're giving the income proportionally or taxing it, that is untrue

Basic income will not incentive production
Just demand

They also seek partners that hold wealth and social status.

My point is: the idea that some people would simply sit on their ass all day is not convincing, because you have that even today. They simply receive welfare. The basic income would get rid of the bureaucratic apparatus behind and simplify the whole thing.

I find economic arguments against it more convincing, e.g. inflation, rent and food becoming more expensive as everyone knows that everyone has extra money to spend, etc.

$700 a month, and full coverage with medicare.

because the poorest will have nothing, which is in nobodies interest. (crime rates rise etc.)

Id be tempted to take UBI in exchange for 0 immigration period. And a wall. With land mines and turrets. And a national holiday where a number of lottery winners get to trebuchet illegals back over the border.

Nice... how’d you get it? Can I claim it if I have a diagnosis for depression?

Deflation will fix this

>uganda
>example of a successful concept

Do you know what will simplify the bureaucratic machine? Less taxes in type and quantity, not universal income

Terrible idea. Make your own money poorfags

the level of pruduction doesn't need to change, what changes is how the gov. uses tax revenue. tax revenue that is being sent 10 times over anyway.

>the level of pruduction doesn't need to change to increase productivity

It is, more successful than before anyway. Besides there are examples from western countries too

>[edit]
A similar field experiment of the Canadian Guaranteed Annual Income (GAI), known as Mincome, took place in Dauphin, Manitoba between 1974 and 1979. According to a research into the effects of Mincome on population health, conducted by a University of Manitoba researcher Evelyn Forget in 2011, the experiment has resulted in significant reduction in hospitalization, specifically in case of mental health diagnoses.[2] Among all the people, only two key groups were found to be discouraged from working by the Mincome project – new mothers and teenaged boys, who, instead of entering the workforce at an early age, decided to study until grade 12, increasing the proportion of students who graduate high school.[3]

I don't subscribe to the anti-statist principle because it enables (((masonic interest groups))) to undermine society more easily. The problem is not the state but how it is set up.

That's the point
Natural selection will fix this

>instead of entering the workforce at an early age, decided to study until grade 12, increasing the proportion of students who graduate high school
How is this a good thing?

Yes, heres a complete guide on how to get autism bux.

imgur.com/a/OyOid

When people get the idea they can vote in wealth, they will do it over and over without stop. They will elect people with ever greater promises for larger UBI until inadvertently the system crashes. It happened during the later days of the roman empire, where emperors were chosen and dethroned based on their army payments by the said army. Guess what happened afterward.

I am not even touching the open immigration and the demotivated citizens the system will suffer severely from.


All in all, until higher % of the GDP is produced by robots, the thing will crash within 5 years or so.

Do you think its better for teenage boys to be dropping out of highschool to work minimum wage jobs?

>Natural selection will fix this
Yes, good goy. It is only "natural" for the white worker to live in poverty while the (((superiors))) lord over them.

Yes
Look at the Amish

I didn't say the state is a enemy. The state is a friend if the state keeps far from economy, my money and my personal life(like setting divorce and marriage contracts) and cracks down on stupid, uncreative, ill and socialist people

Would not work in larger countries like the US. Also I am willing to bet that the individual would not be able to declare bankruptcy and if the govt did not like your political opinion they cease payments.

Why are Mediterranean’s so lazy?

Also you are ignoring the part about the young mothers. Surely you think its better for a society for the women to be able to actually devote time to raising kids rather than getting a job?

Socialists breed like rats here enabling more socialism that will enable more parasites

I am going to guess these young mothers are single mothers

>my personal life
If your personal life is detrimental to the well-being of everyone else then reason has the right to elevate itself to dictatorial force and physically remove you from the premises through a big chimney.

If it made white people get their fucking birthrate up but it will likely do the opposite

It doesn't matter if they are or aren't. Its still better for a woman to be able to raise her kids and not worry about having to work

All those experiments have a fatal flaw. The money came from outside agents, it was not produced by the system.

>Spain and Italy supporting Communism
Shame. Especially you, Spain. How do you go from Commie killers to Commie sympathizer?

Single mothers should have their kids taken away

Good idea if you want to disembowel a society and incinerate everything that makes it good or worth having.

There has always been a strong history of communism in Spain. Franco only one due to the support he received from Italy, Germany, the Vatican etc.

This is exactly what I am asking for. The state must enforce moral and economic interests for the people. Eugenics, anti-woman rights, pro-white,anti-sluts, anti single mothers, anti fags, anti socialists, etc. Dictating marriage terms in favor of sluts and whores isn't any of these

>economic interests for the people
Which also means that it needs to make sure that people do business morally.

I have diagnosed depression, PTSD, and anxiety and im going through this right now, waited for years while trying to work but after so long and being hospitalized a few times I said fuck my pride and filed.

The fail of anti communists is to realize socialism is a hereditary genetic trait. We should move entire families to camps to stop it from the root

I would say we're the most leftist country in Europe, any right wing politic is widely rejected (muh it only helps the rich), i don't know how it is in portugal but Spain and the hispanic countries are full of envy, and that sin it's the cause of socialism in my opinion.

There's a spanish guy called Alejandro Cao de Benós, a communist that works for the north korean goverment and gives some speeches around universities and debates people.
Around 1/3 liked him (in one speech he gave in uni), even clapped when he said that if not every korean can travel around the world, no one could because is not equal, imagine how that people have to be, the deep envy inside them.

>what is communism
fucking kys meme flag

Bad idea that could come good.

I'm completely ok with it if it means the JCP closes and all benefits, state pensions included, are done away with.

youtube.com/watch?v=oDkHLPanjkQ