Basic income

What does Sup Forums think about the government providing basic income to those under the poverty line?

inhabitat.com/ontario-is-rolling-out-a-basic-income-for-citizens-living-under-the-poverty-line/

I think it's robbing the rich at the point of government guns. But the alternative is even uglier.

Nein. Its the fastest way to speed up the decline and extinction of humanity.

This would actually help me a ton right now.

These faggots won't choose me to be a part of this though.

There are approximately 321 million people in this country. Last year's federal budget was 3.8 trillion.

That's less than $12,000 per person per year if we spent everything we had on your 'i dont want to work for my shit' kike bullshit, nigger.

Get off my board.

do you want the cost of everything to rise, while only the lowest wages rise? middle class is going to be dragged down

...

Do you think it's reasonable to fund a UBI from taxes?

Did you even bother to think why that wouldn't work or are you just using that as a straw-man?

Everybody has the right to live, that's it.
A basic income isn't necessary for that and is actually destructive for society in general.

That's not a Basic Income. That's a Guaranteed Minimum Income, also known as a Negative Income Tax. Milton Freedman, libertarian, suggested a Guaranteed Minimum Income in place of the welfare state.

A basic income is universal in that everybody gets a check no matter how wealthy they are and everybody gets the same amount regardless how poor they are.

you can live off of that easily
the feds don't need that much money
gbi has shown to decrease unemployment

kys

I think its a great idea only as a replacement for welfare and other social services. Otherwise its just throwing money at welfare some more

shit idea

I think that as soon as the didindus waste their basic income the Democrats will reintroduce welfare so we end up with both. It is a red herring. There is no choice where basic income truly eliminates the other government programs.

>under poverty line

That's now how UBI is supposed to work, everybody is supposed to get it regardless of income, because of a billion different reasons.

This is just welfare rebranded

Automatization is going to make us unemployed soon, so Basic Income is not about keeping society intact but about not letting us die 3 months after no man is needed for any kind of work.

its meaningless because the market will shift to fix the zero error which assumes everyone has the basic income.

>>>retard economics

>Literal income for not doing shit
Hell no, about as socialistic left as it gets

>realize mass production of every day items with interchangable parts

>create factories, put people to work building said parts

>industryabound.rar

>build machines

>cyberdyne comes online, machines start making all parts because cheaper for employer who wants to get rich

>capitalism.mol

>people have no job, no money to buy things machines make

>machines can't do job

>capitalist faggot sits on his loot as long as possible evading taxes, off shore accounts, 'investing'.

>rich get richer, poor get poorer

all over something that doesn't really exist.

>Do you think it's reasonable to fund a UBI from taxes?

No.

>Did you even bother to think why that wouldn't work or are you just using that as a straw-man?

Have you passed a single mathematics course in your lifetime?

>you can live off of that easily

Not really.

>the feds don't need that much money

Okay?

>gbi has shown to decrease unemployment

Nope.

>kys

After you, faggot.

only give it to random people just enough to remove that margin IE 80%

>Automatization is going to make us unemployed soon, so Basic Income is not about keeping society intact but about not letting us die 3 months after no man is needed for any kind of work.

A UBI can be for many things. The best outcome is if we follow the path of social credit.

Create all new money as a product of the difference between wages (and dividends) and sales. Stop fractional reserve banking and bank creation of currency.

Give people the purchasing power to buy and consume the goods they want, while leaving industry to make profit and operate in a competitive market.

It's also meaningless because you need to remain under a certain income tier level in order to qualify for it, so nobody on this scheme will ever work more than the bare min of hours needed to sustain the payments.

Basic income is another socialist pipe dream that returns every decade or so for a new surge and is backed by people who know nothing about economics but think that by intention always equals outcome.

Nobody for this has actually taken time out of their day to figure out the massive implications of such a thing on the economy and on the fabric of the culture of a nation itself.
Good luck being serfs, you fucking idiots.

>What does Sup Forums think about the government providing basic income to those under the poverty line?

I think that I'd quit my job to collect this, and work under the table for a second income.

Go ahead and implement it so we can tax elites on the coasts and give their money to me.

>create a permanent government dependent underclass
>Hundreds of thousands if not millions of people that will never work, never start a business, and who's only productivity will be voting higher "basic income" for themselves
SOUNDS FUCKING GREAT!

Basically ransom or bribery. It'd be the ideal existence for me but everyone who is honest(white) would be justly outraged.

I remember reading on here about a study showing that eliminating all the bureaucracy related to the whole procedure of granting welfare and simply replacing it with a universal basic income would cost pretty much the same. I don't know how true that is.

There's also constant mention of the runaway inflation boogeyman in these threads however, but no one has ever really explained exactly how that would happen.

Until they make a robot that can do stucco or masonry work, we can all rest easy.

Give me 1(one) reason why I should stay here and work for 1400$ a month instead of becoming a leacher in Canada or any other country with basic bullshit?

>>Did you even bother to think why that wouldn't work or are you just using that as a straw-man?
>Have you passed a single mathematics course in your lifetime?

Well to answer your question, yes. So is that meant to be the answer to my question?

Yes you are just using a stupid understanding of the concept to make a point?

>social credit
I heard about this concept before but I never really understood it.

>Create all new money as a product of the difference between wages (and dividends) and sales.
How is this different from fractional reserve banking and bank creation of currency? You're still printing money.

>Give people the purchasing power to buy and consume the goods they want,
Under a social credit system do people receive a universal basic income?

>leaving industry to make profit and operate in a competitive market.
How does a social credit system help this?

>basic income
>only for people below the poverty line

That's now how basic income works.

Also is this the pilot program? The article reads like it's launching Ontariowide in 2017. I thought they were going to test it in one city first?

It wouldn't cost the same except in terms of government spending (and I'm just assuming it to cost the same in government spending).
Money caught up in the bureaucracy doesn't do much to cause people to permanently stay unemployed.

Its a bunch of commie horseshit, pay should be decided by merit.

Everybody who is talking against it has some good points, however you are talking about a basic income in today's society.
How would you tackle the problem of automization and the loss of millions of jobs in the near future?
I just don't see how the jobs that will be lost in the facilities can be replaced.

>Automatization is going to make us unemployed soon

I've heard that one since the start of the industrial revolution. Once some jobs are automated new ones will come along. If you think progress will stop and we'll just not need new stuff or have new opportunities then you need to look at the agricultural revolution, once the farming was enhanced by machines the people didn't laze about and just eat food from the easy machines, they went to factories and made possible the work and items that could one day be the device you're shitposting from. And once our jobs are automated the same will happen, new stuff will come along, progress won't stop, unless you live in a communist country.

Its a terrible idea. You defeat the whole point of an individual to work and contribute. Unless everyone in society is ultra productive and ambitious (which is what libtards want to believe), this is going to be our end.

Nixon was going to make it real but the Jews stopped him.

No, dummy, you dont realise that many of the people will simply figure out how to survive on that amount, and not work, leeching off the system. About 50 percent will keep working, raking in good money and quickly progressing, while the masses buy up shoes, flat screen TV's and Xboxes.

Actually plenty of jobs exist that a robot will not take over.

1. Teaching
2. Engineering.
3. Mechanics
4. Artists
5. Programmers

Genau

except back in the day the population was low, these days it's growing faster than markets can fill the demand for work

This sounds awfully familiar senpai.

it will drag those just above the poverty line into the poverty line. its a fucking commie scam.

It only works if most people still go seek further employment. so you can only do it with a primarily white population.

>It's Forward

kek

>leeching off the system.

This is only the case if they never spend anything, if they just save their money.

Anyone who spends most or all of what they get from basic income isn't "leeching off the system".

Of course this is only when the money is spent inside the province or country. Spending that money abroad in any large quantity by many people would quickly break the system.

>1. Teaching
>2. Engineering.
>3. Mechanics
>4. Artists
>5. Programmers

These can all be done by machines already.

If Universal Basic Income is to be implemented and tested, it should not be done so before it is absolutely necessary. One a nation is on UBI, it will never, ever vote to leave it. Same with all socialist schemes. The underclass will keep it there forever.

People will still be employed.
Things will be so ridiculously cheap. Even robots will be cheap as fuck.
Take not that people will almost always be more mobile and accessible than robots. If something new pops up, some new innovation, some job that there aren't robots for yet - these will provide momentary employment for those who need work. The minimal amount of hours they put in will be enough to sustain them for months.
You really don't understand just how cheap things can get without human labour.
Take mail for example. Just 20 years ago it to cost half a dollar per letter and take three days to send. Now it's as close to free as possible and can be received in less than half a second. The future is free.

>This is just welfare rebranded

This is a "test run". Though I agree it's retarded to do the test run this way. They would have been better off giving it to everyone in specific towns or regions outside of dense urban areas.

Even if people moved there for the benefits, it's still good. Anything that reverses urbanization is a win.

>mfw programmers think they will not be affected by automation

Population is declining in many areas that are becoming automated and in most of the other areas it is stable and barely rising.

Once you increase the money supply inflation happens, people who sell stuff realize there's more money/more demand for their product or service while supply is mostly the same so they can ask for a higher price and that higher price will balance itself to the new amount of money in circulation to find a new demand/supply equilibrium and that will cancel the higher "wages."

Look at upper education in the US, it's the same, it didn't use to cost that much. But once the government offered loans to some then all people then demand increased but supply remained the same in universities so they increased the prices to find a new equlibrium with the supply and demand created by governmemt money, and that's where we are today.

>How is this different from fractional reserve banking and bank creation of currency? You're still printing money.

The creation of the money is based only on the mathematical product of the gap between sales made and money paid to real people.

The core of Social Credit was that during WWI a British engineer that was doing logistical management for the government found that every business had more sales than they paid out to workers, or they quickly went bankrupt. This lead to an interesting problem of where the money to keep funding those sales came from (Answer it came from loans).

He came up with the idea that you would need to create new money in relation between sales made and money paid to people. That exact amount of money create inflation free purchasing power or money.

>Under a social credit system do people receive a universal basic income?
They can although the most popular system is a 3 way split. Some goes directly to people. The whole cost of the government comes from the created money, (so no taxes). Some goes to pay a negative sales tax that is paid out to retail who keep prices the same over a set period of time to take some of the jitter out of the economy.

>How does a social credit system help this?
Because it leaves businesses to succeed or fail on their own merits. Rather than full socialism that takes government ownership of some or all industry, or for crony capitalism that has businesses getting tax breaks (no income taxes under social credit) or other incentives. It also changes the idea of trade from one of wanting to make exports to earn money, to only wanting to make exports in order to buy goods that can't be economically produced locally (nationally).

>about 50%

you have absolutely no basis for this and pulled this out of your ass.

The supposed 50% (again, totally from your ass) that keep working only have jobs because of the basic income in the first place. Bob with his basic income selling TVs and Xboxes has no TVs and Xboxes to sell if Mitch doesn't have any money to buy them.

I don't know what fictional group you pulled from your ass you are referring to by 'masses'.

So in conclusion you can have (to infinitum) 99% of the people with nothing and the wealth concentrating in a select few OR basic income.

And yes if you're part of that 1% then you're right to whine about your taxes going to Bob and Mitch, but my guess is you're too retarded to realize you're this.

Literally every one of those jobs can be done in part or in whole by automated systems today. Let alone within a few years.

This is also what has us moving forward in terms of technology and new inventions, increasing the standard of living even for the poor.

Interesting. Thanks.

Why would the wealth concentrate upon the 1% if literally nobody else even has money to spend
What are they gonna sell their products to robots?

>posts 4 jobs that machines already do
>posts 'artists' as a job

ok bub

>Once you increase the money supply inflation happens
Once prices start to rise inflation happens. A technical point.

Some of the parts of the job can be done by machines, but there competence at the entire job is very poor or non-existent.

until the bubble bursts and we realize it's all just pieces of paper that represent those things but aren't those things.

An example of the wage gap I was talking about.

>How would you tackle the problem of automization and the loss of millions of jobs in the near future?
>I just don't see how the jobs that will be lost in the facilities can be replaced.

The same way it was dealt before, by doing nothing. Why do you assume first it will happen that fast, second to everyone? Once the farming was automated with machinery, people didn't start doing nothing and whinning for food, the time freed from food making went to new things, new objects to be manufactured, luxuries becoming common place items. The same will happen once some of our current jobs are automated.

>sdupid capitalism with their fiat currency and tax loopholes lol.. vopte bernie

I love the theory behind UBI, but I know that in practice it will be shit.

To implement UBI properly, you must harden your heart to peoples failings. And our society cannot do this.

UBI works if you remove all other social programs. Education and Healthcare would have to have costs, they could no longer be free.

The problem is that this puts a huge number of people out of work, which is governmental suicide. So all those government works in the various programs will need to be kept working on more pointless busy work.

And you know that people will keep failing, even with UBI. People will still run out of money. Run up debt so high they can't afford a house, transportation, food for themselves and their family. And then the left will want to reinstate programs to help those "poor people".

And then they'll have every social program we currently have on top of UBI and be so broke we won't get to exist anymore.

by a magical word called ..... wait for it......


C

R

E

D

I

T

dun dun dunnnnn..

people don't need to have real pieces of paper to get things, they can be given goods and services as long as they promise to give back pieces of paper with old men on them later on.

and this process can just continue into infinity? when every single production job is totally automated there will still be work for hundreds of millions of people doing... what?

clearly the solution is more immigrants, population growth will solve our problem

And there will be jobs in the future that machines can't do.

It really sucked when the horse industry died down and plenty people lost their jobs, but we're all the better for it, and with it came new potential and new jobs that previously didn't exist.

I don't know what type of jobs will exist in the future, but this constant fear mongering over machines is really not based in reality.

I'd like to think it would let us transition to a society that benefits from automation working for us while we relax more. We shouldn't need to work so much as tech progresses.

Star Trek affected me too much :D

There's not much left that could be done without a significant education.

>reduces urbanization
Now my safe space in the boonies could be threatened by ex urbanites, dang.

What? I realize you want off fiat currency, and I do too by the way, but it has nothing to do with capitalism. It's banks not being hold to account.

>Why would the wealth concentrate upon the 1% if literally nobody else even has money to spend
>What are they gonna sell their products to robots?

No human can compete with a good automated system in terms of production / cost.
What little money people have is spent then loans are made to allow people to keep buying.
When everyone has a loan and no income they lose all the limited property and rights they did have in order to make their loan payments.

The few people that actually own the means of production (as it were) will quickly accumulate the last bit of real wealth left around.

As everything keeps becoming more out of reach of common people the number of children born drops in reply to economic forces.

In time all you have left are the wealthy owners of the production. They keep having children and expanding. Leaving part of their production base to their children. In time everyone alive is a part owner of the production.

Sideways eight.

Yes when you tend to tax and regulates markets to hell they don't react well. And China has had good growth, so does India. And raw population means nothing only proportions matter, after the agricultural revolution only 2% of the population was needed for food production, that's a massive freeing of labor and they managed to survive without communist bullshit.

>UBI works if you remove all other social programs. Education and Healthcare would have to have costs, they could no longer be free.

Why?

Why must a UBI end all other services by the government?

>what do you think about Gibs on steroids?
Fastest way to kill a country.

you can't just say credit and then suddenly the rich people get richer
the rich people have to sell things to people to get money
if the people have no way of getting money, then they cannot get goods or loans
the 1% will not be able to sell anything if this is true

This echos my sentiments exactly.
It will never be enough. People will still fuck up and live beyond their means.
There will never be enough dat to gibs, the bleeding hearts will not accept that UBI is sufficient.

I'm somewhat open to the idea as an alternative to welfare but I doubt it'll solve any poverty problems. New problems will exist.

From what I heard, inflation is the increase in money supply, price increase is the effect.

ITT Socialist faggots think its about Dollars and Cents.

Hue hue no. Its about fostering an Attitude, its about Culture. This is why America has raped you lazy faggots for the past 100+ years.

Nice doomsday scenario.

cant wait to kill some commies in my lifetime

money isn't real.

I don't know what will happen in a thousand years but we're not there, we're talking about basic income in 2016 and here and now yes new jobs will come along, luxury items will become commonplace like before and new industries will come.

So with the increase in automation production cost will fall and goods with be cheaper so parents will have more money left for education of their children so they can find jobs in the new markets and industries.

I am all for it.

The world is printing money like stink anyway. It's called quantitative easing and they've been doing it since the GFC.

But it mostly goes into making assets like housing cost a lot more.

Pol is clueless when it comes to how money works. It does grow on trees. Or rather some digits are added to a computer. Cash is just a representation of money.

The Jews and bankers all control this why wouldn't you want to take some of that power away?

Then no need to beg for welfare if you become unemployed. Everyone gets it if they're working or not.

>Automatization is going to make us unemployed soon
No it's not you fucking idiot.

Holy shit.

End central banks, prices come down and NONE of this becomes a problem.

Fuck you people.

swede KEK yoou don't get ti the world will end ofr REAL this time
there's no way the market could work here..
it never has before...
j-just give everyone free stuff that has no backing in resources,, but get the stuff from the GREEDY 1% BANKERS BONUSES who get their money from NOTHING and then the people can spend the BANKERS MONEY on BANKERS goods so that the bankers will have just as much money as they did at the start...!!
socialism
works

What, like politicians?

It would NOT come from taxes. It would simply be printed so to speak.

That's fine, as long as it's tied to mandatory sterilization.

blue-pill
you are not taking their power away
you are making your own being and existence dependent on the dregs of their assholes
enjoy serfdom faggot

Inflation is the change in value of a unit of money in relation to goods. You can have inflation without having any change in the money supply if you radically change the production of goods.

For example if oil production was drastically reduced the price of fuel would go up. The money around is the same amount only it now buys less fuel.

People often confuse the most common cause of the effect with the actual effect. More money is inflation rather than more money can cause inflation.

We're just going to space when we reached automated Utopia.

If you cannot be assed with getting some form of education that will actually pay off, you don't deserve hard working tax payers money.

It really is that simple.

That's called welfare you dumb faggot

If we leave things as they are without a major planned reform the only jobs in the future for 99% of the popular are as entertainment to the wealthy.

>under the poverty line
so... more welfare. Nice. fuck working desu.

become the robot