Reply With Quote
nm
Evaluating what the more progressive countries are doing is bad now. Got it.
nm
Yep, BigFinance is dictating to Fed to raise interest rates since that would dump $10Bs more revenue into BigFinance, while Mulvaney is destoying the CFPB, as dictated by BigFinance
Your white flag has been noted.
Carry on.
Gotta agree with Chris amazingly enough the far left is pretty re ed and embarrassing and they seem to be taking over our party tbh.
*gist
Then what was the point of you posting it, Tyler?
lol too stupid to use google
Your white flag has been noted.
me talking economics with a Bernie Bro
Bro: Bro I been studying da economics and we gots ways to make no moar poors
Me: Huh, you mean poor people? what about them?
Bro: Bro, me figure it out. Dey poor because they no have money, right? that is problem?
Me: Well yeah.
Bro: so problems ois they no have money but need money is only problem
Me: Wait a minute I think I see where you are going with this
Bro: We gives poors money they is no poors. Me make poors go away
Me: yeah but its
Bro: but bro how can they be poors if they have money
Me: sigh
Bro: me solve poors me like economics
Me SeE PoOrS wItH nO MoNeY.
MeGiVeS pOorS mOnEy
Me sOlVe pOvErTy
Certainly didn't read that way in the headline you used. Methinks thou dost protest too much.
"far left" taking over?
Dem establishment, epitomized by the Clintons, is well RIGHT of center, as corrupted by BigMoney as the Repugs
the political class is totally corrupted by BigMoney/oligarchy, with NOTHING being done for the lower 80%. Whatever weak the Dems manage to do (CFPB, ACA), is then destroyed by the Repugs to protect/enable/enrich the oligarchy.
America is ed and un able, in permanent decline controlled by the oligarchy.
Trump actually alreadybaccomplishd that with his tax reform tbh and his elimination of Obama tax
Case closed
Uh, so that everyone who chose to could read it?
Harvest Boxes for all
Don’t be purposely obtuse, Tyler.
i found 100% stone cold evidence that you can never believe is false
^
i found 100% stone cold evidence that you can never believe is false
How much would a job guarantee actually cost?
it sounds like a national program with regional branches. The latter would gather information about who needs work and what needs to be done. Then they would match the needs up.
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) already has a bill that would set up a pilot program in 15 different areas across the country, rural and urban alike.
After testing it for a few years, the program would then presumably expand to a national scale.
Both versions will pay people $15 an hour, and provide health coverage.
Needless to say, expanding that kind of compensation to the millions of Americans still out of work across the country could result in sticker shock.
The paper that Booker's proposal drew from estimated it would cost $543 billion in its first year.
And that was at less than $15 an hour; the higher the wage,
the more Americans will be compelled to switch over from lower-paying jobs.
But there's more to it than just the $500 billion estimate.
That's because if we got a national job guarantee up and running,
something else would happen too:
Medicaid,
food stamps, and
other programs designed to help people in poverty
would massively shrink.
They all operate by providing benefits to people who fall below a certain income threshold.
And with a job guarantee in place, far fewer people would ever drop that low (and in the case of Medicaid, they'd get their health care through their job, too).
Spending on other social ills tied up with unemployment, from health problems to crime to incarceration, would shrink as well.
All those newly employed workers with spending money would stimulate private businesses as well,
leading to more job creation and wage gains.
That would drive up tax receipts, even without any change to current tax policy offsetting yet more of the costs.
http://theweek.com/articles/769531/how-much-job-guarantee-actually-cost
http://prospect.org/article/why-caus...ment-back-deada specific set of dysfunctions of the broader economy has raised full employment from the museum of dead causes. The rise of precarious and poorly paid work, chiefly in but not confined to the service sector; the wage stagnation affecting most of the workforce (which Jared Bernstein do ented in a piece for the Prospect earlier this week; the declining level of labor force participation in those parts of the country where work, particularly remunerative work, has largely disappeared; the chronic economic insecurity of millennials, and the political left turn they’ve executed in response; the opening to more radical economic reforms unleashed by Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign—all these have led to a new economic radicalism bleeding its way into the Democratic mainstream.
some progressives are against UBI for the following reasons:
https://citizensmedia.tv/2018/04/26/fjgvubi/If the government is now paying your salary, even if you are performing poorly, even if you are not working:
- This incentivizes private industry to further reduce wages, which logically extends to the reduction – or elimination – of minimum wage laws.
- Then what’s the point of social safety net programs such as welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.? These programs would necessarilybe eliminated.
- Then what’s the point of fighting so hard for free healthcare and free tuition and lower prescription drug costs and so on? Now people can, at least somewhat, at least temporarily, afford the private industry alternatives. The fights for these progressive programs would just…end.
- Now, all of the sudden, everyone can afford . All at the same time. Competing with everyone for the same stuff, with no increase in productive capacity. UBI is therefore, by its very definition, inflationary. This governmental salary, this “negative tax” for those at the bottom, is instantly devalued. At best, income and wealth inequality is not reduced.
- Would this increase or decrease the incentive to get or keep a job? At least at first…
Here’s the true sinister plot behind UBI: Picture a future and less-friendly Congress, after all these safety nets have been reduced or eliminated. They come in and eliminate or dramatically reduce the UBI program because “these deadbeats want everything for free?!” Our nation is instantly plunged into a private corporation slave-wage scape. No wage or workplace protections, no safety net programs at all.
UBI risks putting the United States into a much much worse position than it already is today…. Well, that is, if you care about the powerless.
some prefer to push forward a federal jobs guarantee:
https://www.cbpp.org/research/full-e...ull-employment
What is your take on UBI Winehole?
Or a Federal job guarantee?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
