Will basic income become the califfornia norm town starts 500.00$ no string payments

[Markle]

So an annual stipend. Do you idiots really want argue over if it is a "dividend" or a stipend. Doesn't matter where it comes from. It is a basic income stipend.

ARE YOU NUTS?

 

[Markle]

They could do it the easy and more cost effective way and just look at Finland. They tried it and dropped it. But as in all things there is always hope that doing the same thing over and over will have a different result.

Finland doesn't have the same economy (or population) as the US. Basic Income has the potential to reverse many of the negative economic trends we've seen over the past five decades.

Why we should all have a basic income

"Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen.

"This income is independent of every other source of income and guarantees you a monthly starting salary above the poverty line for the rest of your life...."

"'Basic income' would be an amount sufficient to secure basic needs as a permanent earnings floor no one could fall beneath, and would replace many of today’s temporary benefits, which are given only in case of emergency, and/or only to those who successfully pass the applied qualification tests.

"UBI would be a promise of equal opportunity, not equal outcome, a new starting line set above the poverty line."

So where do you suggest that this monthly amount come from? Is it going to just magically appear? Do you suggest that we increase taxes to cover the amount. If so then not only do you have to tax a thousand a month but you also need to include the wages of those that are taking in and distributing this new found wealth. So you are talking giving someone $1,000.00 and taxing $1100.00 so a net loss.

Oh let me guess it is the old someone else will pay for my freebies. Yeah the usual stupid bull.

And as usual it may not have worked before but it will this time. Why do so many people always expect a diffrent result from the same input? If you throw a rock into the air, no matter how many times, it still falls down. It will never take flight.

So where do you suggest that this monthly amount come from? Is it going to just magically appear? Do you suggest that we increase taxes to cover the amount. If so then not only do you have to tax a thousand a month but you also need to include the wages of those that are taking in and distributing this new found wealth. So you are talking giving someone $1,000.00 and taxing $1100.00 so a net loss.

Where are you getting your numbers?

Why we should all have a basic income

"What tends to go unrealized about the idea of basic income, and this is true even of many economists – but not all – is that it represents a net transfer.

"In the same way it does not cost $20 to give someone $20 in exchange for $10, it does not cost $3 trillion to give every adult citizen $12,000 and every child $4,000, when every household will be paying varying amounts of taxes in exchange for their UBI.

"Instead it will cost around 30% of that, or about $900 billion, and that’s before the full or partial consolidation of other programmes and tax credits immediately made redundant by the new transfer.

"In other words, for someone whose taxes go up $4,000 to pay for $12,000 in UBI, the cost to give that person UBI is $8,000, not $12,000, and it’s coming from someone else whose taxes went up $20,000 to pay for their own $12,000."

And we shouldn't forget the citizens (legal and natural) who pay NO taxes:

Amazon will pay $0 in federal taxes this year — and it's partially thanks to Trump

So basically you are saying that you think money falls out of the air. We just print more. If you give someone $10.00 you have to get that $10.00 from some where. The funny thing is there is no magic involved.

You can not have something just show up. If I give you three rocks (I am keeping it simple for you) then you give one rock to each of three people and then they give you back only a portion of the rock you gave them. How long can you give each person a whole rock? It is a simple question, there is no hidden answer.

So basically you are saying that you think money falls out of the air. We just print more. If you give someone $10.00 you have to get that $10.00 from some where. The funny thing is there is no magic involved.

Do you see any reason why government can not spend money directly into the real economy in a similar fashion to how it bailed out the economic parasites who crashed the global economy in 2008 with Quantitative Easing?

So you thought quantitative easing was over? Think again

Your chart only runs up to June of 2014. Here is our Monetary Base up to today.

 

[Crepitus]

Last I heard California had a budget surplus in the $10 billion range. You got a link to them going broke?

Yeah, like you, California refuses to see the future and their fact that the $10 billion you allege, is not a light at the end of their tunnel, but a FREIGHT TRAIN!

Turns out to be $30 billion actually.

 

[Markle]

The initial investment could come from the Fed and/or Treasury just as it did for Wall Street's benefit a decade ago:

Universal Basic Income Is Easier Than It Looks

"The Federal Reserve alone could do the job.

"It could buy 'Green' federal bonds with money created on its balance sheet, just as the Fed funded the purchase of $3.7 trillion in bonds in its 'quantitative easing' program to save the banks.

"The Treasury could also do it.

"The Treasury has the constitutional power to issue coins in any denomination, even trillion dollar coins."

Everyone has a vested interest in keeping banks afloat to stave off economic collapse so people will not have their savings wiped out. That banks have acted like greedy criminals is a given but government supposedly has oversight to prevent this sort of thing and they have always failed to keep banks on a short leash. So whose fault is that?

There is the regrettable rationale for keeping banks afloat in spite of themselves at times. In whose interests is it to simply hand out money to trailer park meth heads and those people unwilling to work that the Green New Deal mentions?

No one as far as I can tell except for those bottom of the barrel individuals who will now have cigarette, beer and lottery
money given to them every month, thanks to the productive segment of society.
California again demonstrates why they are swimming in red ink and the most dysfunctional state in the union.

California Dreamin'? Only 5 Countries Have A Bigger GDP Than The Golden State [Infographic]

"One group called YesCalifornia have even laid out the hypothetical legal framework for 'Calexit', calling for an independence referendum in 2019.

"Despite all of 2016's unlikely happenings, most observers agree that an independent California at some point in the future probably won't join the list of crazy occurrences.

"The last time a state seceded was in the 1860s, resulting in the civil war."

Bottom line, what is your point?

 

[Markle]

The initial investment could come from the Fed and/or Treasury just as it did for Wall Street's benefit a decade ago:

Universal Basic Income Is Easier Than It Looks

"The Federal Reserve alone could do the job.

"It could buy 'Green' federal bonds with money created on its balance sheet, just as the Fed funded the purchase of $3.7 trillion in bonds in its 'quantitative easing' program to save the banks.

"The Treasury could also do it.

"The Treasury has the constitutional power to issue coins in any denomination, even trillion dollar coins."

Everyone has a vested interest in keeping banks afloat to stave off economic collapse so people will not have their savings wiped out. That banks have acted like greedy criminals is a given but government supposedly has oversight to prevent this sort of thing and they have always failed to keep banks on a short leash. So whose fault is that?

There is the regrettable rationale for keeping banks afloat in spite of themselves at times. In whose interests is it to simply hand out money to trailer park meth heads and those people unwilling to work that the Green New Deal mentions?

No one as far as I can tell except for those bottom of the barrel individuals who will now have cigarette, beer and lottery
money given to them every month, thanks to the productive segment of society.
California again demonstrates why they are swimming in red ink and the most dysfunctional state in the union.

California Dreamin'? Only 5 Countries Have A Bigger GDP Than The Golden State [Infographic]

"One group called YesCalifornia have even laid out the hypothetical legal framework for 'Calexit', calling for an independence referendum in 2019.

"Despite all of 2016's unlikely happenings, most observers agree that an independent California at some point in the future probably won't join the list of crazy occurrences.

"The last time a state seceded was in the 1860s, resulting in the civil war."

Foolish answer.

Just because someone makes a lot of money, a person, state, or country does not mean they don't spend twice their income. That is called FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. Florida is about number one, California about 45. Nuff said!

 

[Markle]

Last I heard California had a budget surplus in the $10 billion range. You got a link to them going broke?

Yeah, like you, California refuses to see the future and their fact that the $10 billion you allege, is not a light at the end of their tunnel, but a FREIGHT TRAIN!

Turns out to be $30 billion actually.

What part of $427.5 BILLION do you not understand?

 

[Crepitus]

Last I heard California had a budget surplus in the $10 billion range. You got a link to them going broke?

Yeah, like you, California refuses to see the future and their fact that the $10 billion you allege, is not a light at the end of their tunnel, but a FREIGHT TRAIN!

Turns out to be $30 billion actually.

What part of $427.5 BILLION do you not understand?

Do you see that window labeled "debt to gdp ratio"?

15.41%

'Nuff said.

 

[karpenter]

Last I heard California had a budget surplus in the $10 billion range. You got a link to them going broke?

Budget Surplus Means Nothing
As Long As There Is This
California’s Total State and Local Debt Totals $1.3 Trillion | California Policy Center

Basic Economics, Bub

 

[Markle]

Wall of Debt - Unsustainable California
The picture is pretty until you turn it over and look from another angle.

Try looking from the angle of "onerous debt" and its public banking solution:

Solutions to State Debt Burden of California, It is Worth Considering in Your State!

"California cannot solve its budget problems by slashing services that have already been cut to the bone or raising sales taxes that hurt the poor far more than the rich.

"We are fighting over a pie that remains too small.

"The pie itself needs to be expanded – and it can be.

"How? By reclaiming that portion that is now siphoned off in interest and bank fees.

"When tallied up at every stage of production, interest has been calculated to claim one-third of everything we buy.

"How can that money be recaptured?

"By owning the bank.

"The approach was pioneered in North Dakota, the only state to escape the 2008 banking crisis. North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country, the lowest foreclosure rate, the lowest default rate on credit card debt, and no state debt at all. It is also the only state to own its own bank."

The problem isn't in California; it's on Wall Street.

North Dakota is in good shape because of fracking. No other reason.

 

[Markle]

Do you see that window labeled "debt to gdp ratio"?

15.41%

'Nuff said.

States are allowed to sell debt/issue bonds, but deficits proper in the extreme would require printing money to bring the gap down. As a result, states are forbidden by the Constitution to run deficits. This has trickled down in turn to local governments, which otherwise might require the state to bail them out.

https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-state-and-local-governments-run-deficits-in-the-US

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - After months of planning, Stockton, Calif., is sending debit cards loaded with $500 to a select group of residents starting Friday as part of a closely watched experiment in universal basic income, the first led by a U.S. city.

Will 'basic income' become the California norm? Town starts $500 no-strings payments



THESE STUPID ASSES ARE GOING TO GO BROKE SO FAST!! AND WE / THEY / TAX PAYERS ARE GOING TO BE THE ONES WHO PAY FOFR THIS SHIT SYSTEM!! OMFFG!!

Sooner or later you run out off other people's money bahhaha

Will it be racist if the State of CA asks the citizens for an ID to sign up for the $500 stipend? If they can’t ask for an ID will people be signing up under different names to receive multiple checks? Can the millions of non-citizens also collect the free stipend? What if people on bordering states start signing-up for the the free money?

 

[Markle]

I can't find any recent links one way or the other, but I provided link to a $30 billion surplus for this year and projected surpluses in the billions for coming years. If they have unfunded debt they can't really have anything considered a surplus as far as I know.

Your ignorance is far from surprising. Why do you insist on bragging about your ignorance?

 

[keepitreal]

They could do it the easy and more cost effective way and just look at Finland. They tried it and dropped it. But as in all things there is always hope that doing the same thing over and over will have a different result.

Finland doesn't have the same economy (or population) as the US. Basic Income has the potential to reverse many of the negative economic trends we've seen over the past five decades.

Why we should all have a basic income

"Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen.

"This income is independent of every other source of income and guarantees you a monthly starting salary above the poverty line for the rest of your life...."

"'Basic income' would be an amount sufficient to secure basic needs as a permanent earnings floor no one could fall beneath, and would replace many of today’s temporary benefits, which are given only in case of emergency, and/or only to those who successfully pass the applied qualification tests.

"UBI would be a promise of equal opportunity, not equal outcome, a new starting line set above the poverty line."

If people can’t manage a little money,
what makes you think they can handle more money

If someone gets $300 in food stamps,
lives in public housing, has their utilities covered,
that frees up more then $500 dollars...

If they take away those benefits
$500 isn’t going to help any

If they continue to get those benefits
plus $500, shit, they’ll have it made

Finland Gave People $640 a Month...
Here’s What Happened

When they cut the program, these people were lost

One lady was talking about how nice it was
to go to restaurants...wtf

She talked about not having to go out
to apply for assistance, wtf...look for a job bitch

She worked part time as a telemarketer...
That’s what this bitch did

Unfuckingbelievable

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Budget Surplus Means Nothing
As Long As There Is This
California’s Total State and Local Debt Totals $1.3 Trillion | California Policy Center

Basic Economics, Bub

Thank you for trying to educate the stupid. I doubt it sinks in but the effort is admirable.

 

[georgephillip]

You're making a fatal mistake in reasoning if you are actually equating economics and physics Validation in a hard science like physics comes only through two primary forms, theorems and theories. Gravity is a legitimate theory because it has been confirmed through experiments and observations conducted across centuries. Economics rests on assumptions and not on theories or theorems.

What Makes A Good Model in Economics and Finance - ppt video online download

So you are hoping that someone will not notice that you are trying to somehow produce money that is not there? We are talking a fundamental principle in everything here. Given a finite number of objects you can not slit those objects indefinitely. They do not magically respawn.

I was using gravity as an example of a simple principle called stupidity. If you think that tossing a rock into the air somehow equates to economics you may need more help in fundamentals.

Does this mean those pesky telemarketers will go away...? ~S~

Five Millions Tons of Smoke in the Stratosphere | Nuclear Darkness & Nuclear Famine

"Following a war between India and Pakistan, in which 100 Hiroshima-size (15 kiloton) nuclear weapons are detonated in the large cities of these nations, 5 million tons of smoke is lofted high into the stratosphere and is quickly spread around the world.

"A smoke layer forms around both Hemispheres which will remain in place for many years to block sunlight from reaching the surface of the Earth.

"One year after the smoke injection there would be temperature drops of several degrees C within the grain-growing interiors of Eurasia and North America.

"There would be a corresponding shortening of growing seasons by up to 30 days and a 10% reduction in average global precipitation."

The safest continent on the planet will be the one that is the least inhabitable, Antarctica.

So you are hoping that someone will not notice that you are trying to somehow produce money that is not there? We are talking a fundamental principle in everything here. Given a finite number of objects you can not slit those objects indefinitely. They do not magically respawn.

It sounds like you are confusing a national economy capable of electronically creating its own sovereign currency with a household economy?

If so, you have a lot in common with your rocks.

How to Fund a Universal Basic Income Without Increasing Taxes or Inflation

"The other option is 'qualitative easing,' a form of central bank quantitative easing in which the money flows directly into the real economy rather than simply into banks.

"In Europe, politicians are taking another look at this once-derided 'helicopter money.'

"A UBI is being proposed as monetary policy that would stimulate productivity without increasing taxes.

"As Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, former senior vice president of the World Bank, explains:

"'. . . [W]hen the government spends more and invests in the economy, that money circulates, and recirculates again and again. So not only does it create jobs once: the investment creates jobs multiple times.'

"'The result of that is that the economy grows by a multiple of the initial spending, and public finances turn out to be stronger: as the economy grows, fiscal revenues increase, and demands for the government to pay unemployment benefits, or fund social programmes to help the poor and needy, go down.'

"As tax revenues go up as a result of growth, and as these expenditures decrease, the government’s fiscal position strengthens.'"

You are doing a great job of cut and paste. To bad you do not understand anything you are posting.

You have yet to post where you are getting the initial investment. The increase in taxes on increased spending will not compensate for the full universal income payments. Yes paying unemployment and other items will go down because it can be reduced by the amount of the income being given by ubi.

We can postulate a world where elephants fly, six equals four, people are self motivated and always good and debt does not matter. BUT in the world that we actually live in none of that is true.

You have yet to post where you are getting the initial investment. The increase in taxes on increased spending will not compensate for the full universal income payments. Yes paying unemployment and other items will go down because it can be reduced by the amount of the income being given by ubi.

The initial investment could come from the Fed and/or Treasury just as it did for Wall Street's benefit a decade ago:

Universal Basic Income Is Easier Than It Looks

"The Federal Reserve alone could do the job.

"It could buy 'Green' federal bonds with money created on its balance sheet, just as the Fed funded the purchase of $3.7 trillion in bonds in its 'quantitative easing' program to save the banks.

"The Treasury could also do it.

"The Treasury has the constitutional power to issue coins in any denomination, even trillion dollar coins."

So in other words we just print the money which in essence devalues the dollar worldwide.

So we might as well just go whole hog and start throwing our money in the toilet now and save time and energy.

So in other words we just print the money which in essence devalues the dollar worldwide.

Can you wrap your mind around the idea that sovereign governments create money by spending?

MMT Primer

"'The basic idea is that the government can’t run out of money,' Kelton said. 'It creates money just by spending.'

"When people talk about government profligacy bankrupting their grandchildren or triggering a cataclysmic debt crisis, Kelton argues, they’re conflating the experience of a typical family, which has to get money from somewhere outside the household to meet expenses, with that of a sovereign government, which creates money as part of its basic operation."

Stephanie Kelton Has The Biggest Idea In Washington | HuffPost

 

[georgephillip]

They could do it the easy and more cost effective way and just look at Finland. They tried it and dropped it. But as in all things there is always hope that doing the same thing over and over will have a different result.

Finland doesn't have the same economy (or population) as the US. Basic Income has the potential to reverse many of the negative economic trends we've seen over the past five decades.

Why we should all have a basic income

"Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen.

"This income is independent of every other source of income and guarantees you a monthly starting salary above the poverty line for the rest of your life...."

"'Basic income' would be an amount sufficient to secure basic needs as a permanent earnings floor no one could fall beneath, and would replace many of today’s temporary benefits, which are given only in case of emergency, and/or only to those who successfully pass the applied qualification tests.

"UBI would be a promise of equal opportunity, not equal outcome, a new starting line set above the poverty line."

If people can’t manage a little money,
what makes you think they can handle more money

If someone gets $300 in food stamps,
lives in public housing, has their utilities covered,
that frees up more then $500 dollars...

If they take away those benefits
$500 isn’t going to help any

If they continue to get those benefits
plus $500, shit, they’ll have it made

Finland Gave People $640 a Month...
Here’s What Happened

When they cut the program, these people were lost

One lady was talking about how nice it was
to go to restaurants...wtf

She talked about not having to go out
to apply for assistance, wtf...look for a job bitch

She worked part time as a telemarketer...
That’s what this bitch did

Unfuckingbelievable

If people can’t manage a little money,
what makes you think they can handle more money

If someone gets $300 in food stamps,
lives in public housing, has their utilities covered,
that frees up more then $500 dollars...

If they take away those benefits
$500 isn’t going to help any

A temporary trial program gave $500 a month to selected citizens; however, any perpetual national UBI stipend in the US would have to be closer to $1000 a month which would still make affordable housing an issue for many recipients.

 

[Crixus]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - After months of planning, Stockton, Calif., is sending debit cards loaded with $500 to a select group of residents starting Friday as part of a closely watched experiment in universal basic income, the first led by a U.S. city.

Will 'basic income' become the California norm? Town starts $500 no-strings payments



THESE STUPID ASSES ARE GOING TO GO BROKE SO FAST!! AND WE / THEY / TAX PAYERS ARE GOING TO BE THE ONES WHO PAY FOFR THIS SHIT SYSTEM!! OMFFG!!

Sooner or later you run out off other people's money bahhaha

When since 1920 has $500 been an income?

Especially since now you can legally do that in a day here in modern times. California-Mexico is a Democrat model for the rest of the country. Keep them fat, stupid and on the couch.

 

[georgephillip]

They could do it the easy and more cost effective way and just look at Finland. They tried it and dropped it. But as in all things there is always hope that doing the same thing over and over will have a different result.

Finland doesn't have the same economy (or population) as the US. Basic Income has the potential to reverse many of the negative economic trends we've seen over the past five decades.

Why we should all have a basic income

"Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen.

"This income is independent of every other source of income and guarantees you a monthly starting salary above the poverty line for the rest of your life...."

"'Basic income' would be an amount sufficient to secure basic needs as a permanent earnings floor no one could fall beneath, and would replace many of today’s temporary benefits, which are given only in case of emergency, and/or only to those who successfully pass the applied qualification tests.

"UBI would be a promise of equal opportunity, not equal outcome, a new starting line set above the poverty line."

I can only presume you are joking! Or...you are a joke.

I can only presume you are joking! Or...you are a joke

What do you find comical about enhancing equal opportunity?

Why we should all have a basic income

"Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen.

"This income is independent of every other source of income and guarantees you a monthly starting salary above the poverty line for the rest of your life.

"What do you do? Possibly of more importance, what don’t you do?

"How does this firm foundation of economic security and positive freedom affect your present and future decisions, from the work you choose to the relationships you maintain, to the risks you take?"

Do you chuckle at the prospect increasing your capacity to act upon your free will instead of blindly submitting to collective market forces?

 

[fncceo]

Do you chuckle at the prospect increasing your capacity to act upon your free will instead of blindly submitting to collective market forces?

So what do you think will happen to market forces when the income of every person in the country goes up by $1,000 per month?

Everything from rent to food just went up by exactly $1200 a month.

 

[georgephillip]

Do you chuckle at the prospect increasing your capacity to act upon your free will instead of blindly submitting to collective market forces?

So what do you think will happen to market forces when the income of every person in the country goes up by $1,000 per month?

Everything from rent to food just went up by exactly $1200 a month.

So what do you think will happen to market forces when the income of every person in the country goes up by $1,000 per month?

Everything from rent to food just went up by exactly $1200 a month.

If the purpose of a currency lies in its exchange for goods and services and the total amount of currency in circulation increases faster than the total amount of goods and services in the economy, then inflation will result.

Wouldn’t Unconditional Basic Income Just Cause Massive Inflation?

UBI stipends would be spent buying goods and services, and there are some UBI models that don't require any new money but rather a shifting of money from one location to another, meaning the value of each dollar has not changed. "The dollar itself has only changed hands."

U.S. Wealth Inequality Is Extreme and Republican Tax Plans Would Make It Worse