Socialists are coming for the Democratic Party

[L.T. Fan]

You'll be singing a different tune in 2-3 decades when million of jobs go extinct, and I don't want to hear about "maintaining the machines". I don't necessarily think it's something that should be implemented tomorrow but I think it should be seriously studied/considered over the next 10-20 years.

UBI is a very libertarian idea and I'd bet that it'd save money in the long-term if there were corresponding reforms made to Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security, etc., to account for the extra income people will have.

The only problem is that it's the direct opposite of the American ethos that glorifies work, which is mostly just a fairy tale people like to tell themselves.

You obviously do not know what built this country. It was the work ethic of the citizens both born and naturalized. And it was the thought that everyone had a chance to improve their lot. Discipline and responsibility were the cornerstones of the passageway to getting ahead. You earned your way to achievement.

That probably sounds pretty cornball to those that were brought up in the 60’s and forward when the living standard had been established by this time by the prior generations and technology was matter of fact.

The one thing that has surfaced from the nations prosperty is that the American way is everyone’s by virtue of being an American and it is an entitlement for simply being born within these boundaries. I do understand how people would think so because the majority of the population has nothing to relate to as far as how all the prosperty came about, only that it is automatically here and should be imparted to all regardless of knowing how to earn it.

I know this will be viewed as a soap box from an old geezer that is out of touch with current reality but the current generation and next will have to deal with the fall out of living in a utopiah that has no foundation.

That’s my 2 cents worth of guaranteed minimum incomes.

 

[skidadl]

Freedom is always better even if poverty is the cost.

 

[BipolarFuk]

 

[NoDak]

One small difference in this subsidy over the welfare it's being compared to, though. The farmers did actual WORK to receive it. It's not like they're sitting on their ass doing nothing and just waiting for their monthly check to arrive.

 

[BipolarFuk]

One small difference in this subsidy over the welfare it's being compared to, though. The farmers did actual WORK to receive it. It's not like they're sitting on their ass doing nothing and just waiting for their monthly check to arrive.

Weird.

You can't get a welfare check here unless you are in a work program or school.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Weird.

You can't get a welfare check here unless you are in a work program or school.

Except you don't actually have to work...

 

[Kbrown]

You obviously do not know what built this country. It was the work ethic of the citizens both born and naturalized. And it was the thought that everyone had a chance to improve their lot. Discipline and responsibility were the cornerstones of the passageway to getting ahead. You earned your way to achievement.

That probably sounds pretty cornball to those that were brought up in the 60’s and forward when the living standard had been established by this time by the prior generations and technology was matter of fact.

The one thing that has surfaced from the nations prosperty is that the American way is everyone’s by virtue of being an American and it is an entitlement for simply being born within these boundaries. I do understand how people would think so because the majority of the population has nothing to relate to as far as how all the prosperty came about, only that it is automatically here and should be imparted to all regardless of knowing how to earn it.

I know this will be viewed as a soap box from an old geezer that is out of touch with current reality but the current generation and next will have to deal with the fall out of living in a utopiah that has no foundation.

That’s my 2 cents worth of guaranteed minimum incomes.

Part of this "foundation" your generation "built" included a lot of borrowing and government programs that my generation and my daughter's generation have to pay for.

I will be lucky to see the benefit of the social security I am paying into. But I'm guessing it is beer money for you right now.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Part of this "foundation" your generation "built" included a lot of borrowing and government programs that my generation and my daughter's generation have to pay for.

I will be lucky to see the benefit of the social security I am paying into. But I'm guessing it is beer money for you right now.

Social Security is a Tax. Most of us have paid it throughout our lifetime. It isn’t a retirement fund that is owed to or owned by anyone. A recipient has to apply for and be granted eligibility to receive it. It can be granted to someone who hasn’t paid a dime into it. I agree there is too much give always in the system and needs to be cut back.

I don’t drink beer.

 

[Angrymesscan]

Yeah, but more capitalism is the answer, not less. Socialism stagnates growth, capitalism creates and grows wealth. The problems you name are almost entirely due to NON free market forces, not because of capitalism.

Ironically the end result of capitalism very likely is that certain things become so cheap that they are essentially free, so "universal basic income" is probably not entirely a pipe dream. Imagine a world where the government can, on a ridiculously small percent tax of our labor, like half a percent, maintain robots to grow food in hydroponic skyscrapers and build houses in underground silos for everyone. Fusion has made energy so cheap that a couple of small plants across the country provide enough energy for every citizen hundreds of times over, so it's dirt cheap also. Bam, universal basic income. Capitalism achieves these things.

Pure capitalism would also allow whoever’s owns or reaches said goals to price them as they want and crush upcoming competition and BAM! The rich get richer while the middle class keeps thinning out and the poor get poorer...

 

[L.T. Fan]

Pure capitalism would also allow whoever’s owns or reaches said goals to price them as they want and crush upcoming competition and BAM! The rich get richer while the middle class keeps thinning out and the poor get poorer...

There are stop gap laws to deal with this in the anti trust laws.

 

[Angrymesscan]

There are stop gap laws to deal with this in the anti trust laws.

Hence the pure capitalism mention and those same anti trust laws were and at times still are criticized as socialist and progress stopping...

 

[L.T. Fan]

Hence the pure capitalism mention and those same anti trust laws were and at times still are criticized as socialist and progress stopping...

Still the best system going. What would be your recommendation for a replacement?

 

[Kbrown]

Social Security is a Tax. Most of us have paid it throughout our lifetime. It isn’t a retirement fund that is owed to or owned by anyone. A recipient has to apply for and be granted eligibility to receive it. It can be granted to someone who hasn’t paid a dime into it. I agree there is too much give always in the system and needs to be cut back.

I don’t drink beer.

Thanks for defining how social security works. Was there an assertion here?

 

[L.T. Fan]

Thanks for defining how social security works. Was there an assertion here?

No. Only that you seemed as if you might be deprived of benefits even though you are paying into the system because maybe prior generations would use it up. It seemed to me that you were using the possible failure of the fund to fault prior generations for placing this potential burden on your and succeding generations. That indeed may happen but it has helped many individuals who would otherwise have no way to continue to survive.

 

[Kbrown]

No. Only that you seemed as if you might be deprived of benefits even though you are paying into the system because maybe prior generations would use it up. It seemed to me that you were using the possible failure of the fund to fault prior generations for placing this potential burden on your and succeding generations. That indeed may happen but it has helped many individuals who would otherwise have no way to continue to survive.

Great. But then I would just prefer not to be lectured to about how self-reliant everyone used to be.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Pure capitalism would also allow whoever’s owns or reaches said goals to price them as they want and crush upcoming competition and BAM! The rich get richer while the middle class keeps thinning out and the poor get poorer...

I don't know of anyone on the right who wants pure Wild West capitalism with zero rules or regulations.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Great. But then I would just prefer not to be lectured to about how self-reliant everyone used to be.

Wasn’t intended as a lecture. I am not aware of what you know and you expressed a concern about Social Security and that you have paid into it but had apprehensions about whether the system would be there for you. Some people think it is a retirement system so I was just explaining how it worked.

 

[Smitty]

I don't know of anyone on the right who wants pure Wild West capitalism with zero rules or regulations.

No one has ever argued that, on this board, or in main stream society for like a hundred years. It’s a straw man used by the left.

Capitalism thrives on competition and monopoly is the opposite of competition, so obviously anti monopoly laws are important to a capitalist society. But anti-monopoly laws are not by definition “socialist.”

 

[fortsbest]

I agree although having a sprinkling of socialism in a majority-capitalist system is perfectly fine, obviously just not to the extent the original article describes.

There's no such thing as a sprinkle of socialism. Every single socialist country is a fail. And don't throw Scandinavian countries as examples because they aren't socialist and will tell you so themselves. They are governments that are high tax environments that use the taxes in healthcare and other things people consider socialism, but aren't. In socialism, the government controls the means of production, in those countries, citizens do, but are taxed at high rates. That isn't socialism.

 

[BipolarFuk]

There's no such thing as a sprinkle of socialism. Every single socialist country is a fail. And don't throw Scandinavian countries as examples because they aren't socialist and will tell you so themselves. They are governments that are high tax environments that use the taxes in healthcare and other things people consider socialism, but aren't. In socialism, the government controls the means of production, in those countries, citizens do, but are taxed at high rates. That isn't socialism.

People don't want the government to control industry.

They want healthcare and continued education because they are fucking unaffordable to a lot of them.