This, America, is what we need.
(no message)
asked them for questions, unlike Beto who stands on the table/counter to make sensational speech.
He's agin' it
Link: https://www.andykessler.com/andy_kessler/2018/10/wsj-.html
tax exemptions, tax credits... and many things. I think it puts all people on an equal footing, unlike our conventional thinking that focus only around a privileged "victimized class" and this class only becomes bigger & bigger, not vanishes as those welfare programs intend to do. Another natural feature is UBI gives people choices to manage the money.
Like the candle makers who protested electricity and the textile workers who destroyed textile machines, these people decrying AI and automation are blissfully ignorant. Society will adapt and the world will be better for it.
And his 10% VAT is the last thing America needs.
assistance:
______________________
More recently, in a 2006 book, conservative intellectual Charles Murray proposed eliminating all welfare transfer programs, including Social Security and Medicare, and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone 21 years and older. The Alaska Permanent Fund, funded by investments from state oil revenues, sends annual dividend checks to the state’s residents. Switzerland is voting on an unconditional basic income later this year. (Though the fundamental basic-income guarantee involves an unconditional grant to every citizen, no matter their wealth or age, other versions wouldn’t cut checks to those in top tax brackets or those receiving Social Security.)
Apart from lifting millions out of poverty, the plans promote efficiency and a shrinking of the federal bureaucracy. No more “79 means-tested programs.” Creating a single point of access would also make many recipients’ lives easier. If they knew they had something to fall back on, workers could negotiate better wages and conditions, or go back to school, or quit a low-paying job to care for a child or aging relative. And with an unconditional basic income, workers wouldn’t have to worry about how making more money might lead to the loss of crucial benefits. In the Financial Times, Martin Wolf has contemplated a guaranteed income’s ability to help society adjust to the disappearance of low-skill, low-wage jobs.
______________________
Andrew Yang is Democrat who is actually proposing a thoughtful policy. Believe it or not, it has some support on the right. It shouldn't be immediately dismissed.
Yang isn't just running on personality like Beto.
Link: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/
(no message)
Ultimately, it means "dependence," which runs contrary to core human psychology. We are all born totally dependent and from that moment on strive to free ourselves. The only way a government can deal with human nature is to repress it brutally!
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/26/welfare-system-beveridge-75-years
I wouldn’t completely dismiss it. It also enhances the idea of personal choice as to what is done with it.
I am skeptical of it's effects as any conservative minded person would be, but I am also open-minded. It's inevitable that automation in the trucking, retail and food service industries will be devastating to a large segment of society and this is one attempt to get ahead of that. But UBI isn't the point of my original post.
Andrew Yang is a serious candidate, he has 70 policy proposals on his website and after listening to both podcasts and watching several interviews a few comments:
1. He has a bit of work to do on his delivery and persona. On the Sam Harris podcast in particular he has this habit of nervous laughter not unlike Hillary. In several of the interviews he comes off a bit elitist and condescending.
2. He is an actual "stable genius", unlike Trump. He's an actual self-made man, unlike Trump. He is smart and his positions are well-researched. With some fine tuning, I expect him to kill it at the debates.
3. He's targeting the right demographic to beat Trump.
nts
You cannot possibly believe that, can you? This would be in addition to other federal programs, not in place of. And the second UBI were to be implemented, people would be screaming that it's not enough.
He discusses this at this point:
candidate on the Democratic side who seriously proposes to cut deficit spending by displacing 79 means-tested federal benefit programs with a reasonable alternative?
What Yang is really doing is advancing entitlement reform in a serious way.
He is the only Democrat doing this.
Republicans should be open to working with him.
(no message)
Kudos to him for advancing the discussion.
(no message)
; we'll give you money assuming you'll spend it. How they spend it is up for discussion. As part of full entitlement reform, I think it can be a great idea. If it's just a supplement, I'm not. It basically just becomes an additional safety net, no different than food stamps, welfare, school lunches, etc. His $ suggestion also is challenged by higher costs in different parts of the country.
He's acknowledging that AI, ML and automation will inevitably replace people which is a threat to society. He is attempting to get ahead of that.
Listen to the podcast.
(no message)
Here's 15 minutes of Milton Friedman talking about a similar main concept, but a wide range of topics are discussed.
topics. I had a chance to hear Buckley speak; his enunciation in his later years made him tough to understand.
To the point at hand, Friedman's negative taxation is a long way from Yang's UBI. The $1000 he is suggesting will be quickly eaten up by inflation. Likewise, without reform to other entitlements, it's just another tax. Finally, points 1, 3 and 4 from his own site are pipedreams.
- UBI, essentially, would be going to those who do not need it
- It wouldn't raise the GDP, outside of generating inflation - it would be an artificial salary increase
- no rationale argument can be made that it would help health care, incarceration, homelessness services
And even if you don't agree on this issue, you should listen to him talk.
Link: http://rooseveltinstitute.org/modeling-macroeconomic-effects-ubi/
Haven't listened to this one yet.