Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income

Author Topic: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income  (Read 104131 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #40 on: May 18, 2015, 01:48:11 AM »
1 reason for Basic Income: is get off your lazy arse and go to WORK!

Apparently I need to point out this fact yet again: there are millions more Americans in need of "work" than there are job openings:

-- http://www.epi.org/publication/jobs-60-percent-job-seekers/

And thanks to the anti-Georgist tax policy-induced rent-wage gap, millions of the jobs that are available don't pay a living wage:

-- http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/nyregion/in-new-york-having-a-job-or-2-doesnt-mean-having-a-home.html?_r=0

Mantras like "get a job!" and "do some work!" -- while emotionally gratifying to those who invoke them -- do absolutely nothing to change that economic reality.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline jerryweaver

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,430
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #41 on: May 18, 2015, 06:29:04 AM »
It’s Not About the Machines
How Leading Economists Misunderstand Productivity and Jobs

http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/voices/roger-pielke-jr/its-not-about-the-machines




Manufacturing and Agriculture has made significant gains in productivity in the recent years without adding Jobs.

We were assured the service economy would create new opportunities.  Didn't happen.

The war and national security economy has created a considerable amount of opportunity but, the social cost is becoming a burden.

With a Basic Guaranted Income We possibly might not have as many who will do anything for a buck. 

If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #42 on: May 18, 2015, 06:52:56 AM »
1 reason for Basic Income: is get off your lazy arse and go to WORK!

In my life I have done many jobs/with skills to make cash and thus support my clan: this is called WORK!

Our world has become lazy because of technology and this will only get worse as time rolls on...

Bottom line is: you need cash---then get off your duff and do some WORK!


There are People out of work than Jobs, so the Maths don't Add Up.

Secondly, the world is changing. The future says there will always be more people than Jobs - as technology is destroying jobs faster than it creates jobs. At present the middle and upper class think "that don't effect me", but rapidly it will . . . For example, surgeons will be replaced by robots in the predictable future. Pilots, will be replaced, and these where considered really good safe professions.

The illuminati would love to spread the idea that if a man don't work, he don't eat, because permanent unemployment is rapidly going to rise to around there magic 80%.

Sure, up till now technology has mainly replaced the low skilled.
However, replacing highly paid workers with machines makes the most economic sense.

Now is the time to change how we view work, because the world has and will continue to change.

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,844
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #43 on: May 20, 2015, 05:10:51 AM »
I will NEVER change my view: that if folks WANT to WORK they will find WORK if they get off their LAZY ARSES!

I started working at the age of 11: delivering News Papers at 5:00 in the morning: and I worked all my life and attained many skills: What I have seen over these last 49 years is that there are more LAZY Folks Now than there were in the past!

Or maybe: people have been Dumbed Down to the point that they do not even know they are lazy?  ???
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #44 on: May 20, 2015, 09:07:58 AM »
I will NEVER change my view

Nor will I ever change the contrary view I expressed above.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #45 on: May 20, 2015, 02:49:36 PM »
I will NEVER change my view: that if folks WANT to WORK they will find WORK if they get off their LAZY ARSES!

I started working at the age of 11: delivering News Papers at 5:00 in the morning: and I worked all my life and attained many skills: What I have seen over these last 49 years is that there are more LAZY Folks Now than there were in the past!

Or maybe: people have been Dumbed Down to the point that they do not even know they are lazy?  ???

Its Maths.
More people than Jobs.
We have More People looking for work than there are Jobs Available.
So if everyone did get off there lazy proverbial, we would still have people out of work.

Its not opinion, its just the way it is my friend.

It used to be different, but with technology replacing people, and companies moving over seas for cheap labour, its not going to get better.


Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Alan Watts on Automation and Unconditional Basic Income Guarantee
« Reply #46 on: May 21, 2015, 09:09:42 AM »
Alan Watts on Socially Responsible Automation and an Unconditional Basic Income Guarantee:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhvoInEsCI0


Watts is right: psychologically an alarming number of people are still stuck in the 17th century.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline jerryweaver

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,430
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #47 on: May 21, 2015, 11:28:28 AM »
Or maybe: people have been Dumbed Down to the point that they do not even know they are lazy?  ???

It only takes a couple Generations to lose things like the metalworking skills or the ability to make houses with plumbing and electricity.

The farming agriculture groups that were so strong and helped the US through the great depression is a great example. 

Because of Monsanto and fears of chemical poison in the food the US has seen a Renaissance in the pride in growing your own.

How many folks are using the internet to learn new things for the sake of learning and not for economic reasons? Many I would guess.

Gives me hope to see that.  Ending debt slavery may give us many more choices on how we stay relevant in society. 


Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,844
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2015, 09:28:49 PM »
Its Maths.
More people than Jobs.
We have More People looking for work than there are Jobs Available.
So if everyone did get off there lazy proverbial, we would still have people out of work.

Its not opinion, its just the way it is my friend.

It used to be different, but with technology replacing people, and companies moving over seas for cheap labour, its not going to get better.
my friend; I understand your point: and it is correct [ the math does not add up]: what I am sayin is: ' Most folks are LAZY and Can Not Make Their own Work: and thus they Depend on the New Way of Working: Which is dictated by the New World Order! [this is called: by me: "The Robotic Human Work Force:  (RHWF)
 
... they [ the Nazis] control the jobs we get: and what I am saying is: Create your own nit-ch in the work force and then employers will hire the thinkers who are not Lazy!

Hypothetical: 'if folks got off their lazy arses do ya think, The New World Order, would have come so far?' ;) ;)

..and brother it is sad to see our Western way of life, being turned into a Third World Planet ---No Jobs = No Food!
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,844
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2015, 09:31:42 PM »
Nor will I ever change the contrary view I expressed above.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Gentleman's agreement  8)

It is just tough times for all of us---just glad to see ya fighting the Nazis!

GOD Bless ya mate and your clan!
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,844
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #50 on: May 21, 2015, 09:39:18 PM »
It only takes a couple Generations to lose things like the metalworking skills or the ability to make houses with plumbing and electricity.

The farming agriculture groups that were so strong and helped the US through the great depression is a great example. 

Because of Monsanto and fears of chemical poison in the food the US has seen a Renaissance in the pride in growing your own.

How many folks are using the internet to learn new things for the sake of learning and not for economic reasons? Many I would guess.

Gives me hope to see that.  Ending debt slavery may give us many more choices on how we stay relevant in society.
I have hope and I pray everyday that GOD will give US a second chance; then I realize that GOD is in the Second Chance business---these are called Miracles---and this world needs a big miracle soon... ;)

"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Economic grace of ‘Social Credit’
« Reply #51 on: August 20, 2015, 11:44:30 AM »
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/economic-grace-of-social-credit-national-dividend-and-compensated-retail-prices-to-facilitate-consumer-goods-distribution-in-an-age-of-robotics.html

Economic grace of ‘Social Credit’: national dividend and compensated retail prices to facilitate consumer goods distribution in an age of robotics

Washington's Blog
Posted on July 20, 2015 by Carl Herman

by guest author Wallace Klinck

“The unacknowledged, but obvious, truth is that unnecessary work, imposed by either edict or contrived financial legerdemain, is slavery and servitude—totally irrational and immoral.  Every engineer worthy of the name is trying to eliminate the need for human effort as a factor of production while every witless or hypocritical politician, pressured by the financial powers above and an insecure and uncomprehending population below, is professing, at least, to promote policies designed to ‘put people back to work.’” (from the below article)

Five minute video of Major C.H. Douglas, founder of Social Credit (1934):

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpHJdApvtO0

Because of its deleterious impact on personal freedom and initiative, centralization of both economic and political power is the critical issue facing society. The primary obstacle to reversing this growing concentration of power is an almost universal ignorance of the manner in which the existing financial system renders the price-system increasingly non-self-liquidating, making impossible the recovery of industrial production costs through sales. Institutions and individuals attempt to resolve this problem by resorting to bank debt, thereby obtaining access to the products of industry by the self-defeating expedient of mortgaging our future–i.e., transferring these costs as an exponentially growing debt charge against future cycles of production–and by engaging in an orgy of wasteful and destructive activities, effectively culminating in continuous war.

Their monopolistic proclivities disincline both Finance-Capitalism operating under the Monopoly of Credit and every form of collectivist organization (e.g., socialism, communism or fascism) from grappling with this problem.  The solution must entail an appropriate modification of the existing financial-credit and price system so as to properly facilitate distribution of the immense output of modern technology-based industry, in the context of expanding leisure.

Nearly a century ago this emergent challenge was studied in depth by the British engineer Clifford Hugh Douglas, who not only analyzed the defects of the existing price system as it functions under present financial and industrial cost-accounting conventions, but also put forward realistic remedial proposals.  Between and for a period after the World Wars, Douglas’s ideas, which he named “Social Credit”, attracted large numbers of adherents and spawned many political movements in countries around the world.

Douglas recognized that life is more than bread alone and that in order to attain his full stature man must be released from unnecessary material concerns in order to make time for matters of the Mind and Spirit. This clearly was inherent in certain much-neglected aspects of the message of Jesus, who explicitly stated that lack of faith is the reason for our obsession with toiling our own way to material survival. Jesus asked how we could doubt that God, who provides for the fish and birds and the beasts, knows our needs and will provide even better for us. On more than one occasion Jesus unconditionally distributed loaves and fishes to crowds that had gathered to hear him. To indicate how reality operates outside of puritanical human notions of morality, Jesus pointed out that his heavenly Father causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and lets rain fall on both the just and the unjust.

An aspect of this divine caring is the ability we have been given to accumulate understanding of natural laws, which has resulted in an endless extension of “mechanical advantage”—termed by Social Crediters the Unearned Increment of Association—from which has emerged our amazing modern technology with its outflow of material abundance. Through learning how to associate effectively in the areas of both human endeavours and material resources, we have multiplied our productive capacity many thousands, if not millions, of times over.  The historical aggregation of Unearned Increments has provided the vast Cultural Heritage upon which we all so greatly, if unconsciously, depend.

This is the background of why Social Credit came to be perceived by its leading thinkers as “practical Christianity”. Although Douglas did not set out to design it as such, ongoing development of Social Credit thought has revealed it to be uniquely consonant with and revelatory of the assurances given by the founder of the Christian faith.

This realistic perception of our situation is absent from the major ideologies of our time.  For example, Libertarians promote the notion that the individual must “make it on his/her own”. No one today (apart maybe from individuals lost in the wilderness) is doing this; all have the benefit of the Cultural Heritage, which ties us in a web of dependencies not only with our contemporaries but also with previous generations.

Socialism, which calls for State ownership and administration of the means of production—the central planning of the economy and of human activity—similarly endeavors to alienate people from their heritage.  Besides specifically attacking the very principle of inheritance, Socialists force the energies of the members of society into mandatory employment in projects prescribed by the State. Suppression of individual initiative is an inevitable result of this constraint of access to the possibilities afforded by the richness of the Cultural heritage. This observation applies to all forms of “socialism”, whether national or international in nature.

Social Credit is the inverse of socialism and a negation of finance capitalism.  Many persons have it in their minds that a sharing society necessarily is socialistic; i.e., power centralizing. Presumably they think this way on the erroneous assumption that the sharing will be accomplished by redistributing existing wealth by means of various confiscatory forms of taxation.  However, Social Credit, uniquely, stands not for redistribution of earned incomes, but rather for distribution of consumer goods at source as they emerge from the production line.

Douglas enunciated and stressed the truism that production without consumption is sheer futility and waste.

The fundamental task of economic policy is to match and balance the cycles of consumption and production.  Producers’ costs cannot be recovered without money received from consumers, whose incomes alone provide business its means to liquidate all financial costs of production.

In order to effect this balance, Douglas recommended that National (Consumer) Dividends and Compensated (lowered) Prices at point of retail sale must be provided and financed by a Government Agency (created or existing, whatever is most efficient and convenient) with funds not derived from taxation but drawn down from a properly constructed National Credit Account.  This would be a continuously updated actuarial accounting of the nation’s real credit, being an inventory of all those resources which are available to be used for production and which, if so used, may result in the making of financial prices.

Unfortunately, the public are conditioned to reason from the false assumption that the economic “pie” is limited to the financial incomes paid out in production, and hence they perceive this as the only possible source of funding. This assumption includes the erroneous corollary that the price-system is self-liquidating; i.e., that incomes paid out as wages, salaries and dividends are not only equal to, but available to meet, the total financial costs of production. That this is a major fallacy is readily proved by the enormous accumulation of inflationary private and public debt created as loans by the banking system, which allows goods to be purchased after a fashion but does not liquidate their financial costs of production in a synchronized fashion.  As a kind of stop-gap expedient, these loans merely transfer these costs into the future, to be liquidated with income derived from later cycles of production unrelated to the cycles in which they were incurred.

The physical (i.e., real) costs of production are met as production takes place. Obviously, if this were not the case, production could not proceed.  This is self-evident and axiomatic. When goods are produced in finished form they are meant to be used and should be immediately available to the overall consuming public in toto and without entailing any residual financial debt.

This universal piling-up of debt is bogus and is required only because price increasingly includes, as real capital replaces labor as a factor of production, allocated charges in respect of real capital which are not distributed as income in the same cycle of production. Consumer income is cancelled prematurely, leaving a growing deficiency of income relative to the total prices of goods awaiting purchase. In other words, the flow of final prices increasingly exceeds the flow of effective financial purchasing-power. Purchasing-power is prematurely cancelled in respect of still existing real capital, whereas it should be cancelled only at the rate of actual physical consumption or depletion.  Money should be issued at the rate of production and cancelled at the rate of consumption.

In the face of this predicament, we can simply forgo acquisition of these goods, leaving the producer no option but to warehouse or destroy them and go bankrupt—making his endeavors a mindless exercise in futility. Or we can ensure that, while required remaining actual “workers” (i.e., recipients of remuneration from others for services rendered) continue to have the benefit of their earnings, all citizens, workers included, have access to the full output of industry by being provided adequate aggregate purchasing-power to make this possible.

Besides being a practical necessity, such an arrangement recognizes the share all have in the almost fantastic Cultural Heritage of Civilization. In a Social Credit dispensation, Inheritance would be generalized.

In stark contrast is the socialist attitude, which is that inheritance is evil and should be abolished.

Social Credit stands most definitely, unashamedly and unabashedly, for a sharing society—and as labor is increasingly reduced by technology it would become more sharing with the passage of time. Unlike Socialism, which in reality has always been more about centralized control than about sharing, Social Credit does not involve State ownership, planning or administration of the economy or of social organization as such. By giving people as individuals full access to the ever-increasing abundance made possible by technology and to concomitant economic independence, it is in fact highly decentralizing.

The rational purpose of technology is to eliminate inefficiency, and “jobs” concocted merely for the sake of distributing incomes are precisely that—mere wasted energy and materials.  The solution to the problem of economic insecurity in the modern age of super-production does not lie primarily in “making” work, but increasingly in facilitating distribution.  Those who clamor for “jobs” actually visualize a model along the lines of fascist and communist states, which give and demand of everyone endless work throughout their lifetime, in accordance with the rather suspect dictum that “work will make you free”—but not until you die.

The unacknowledged, but obvious, truth is that unnecessary work, imposed by either edict or contrived financial legerdemain, is slavery and servitude—totally irrational and immoral.  Every engineer worthy of the name is trying to eliminate the need for human effort as a factor of production while every witless or hypocritical politician, pressured by the financial powers above and an insecure and uncomprehending population below, is professing, at least, to promote policies designed to “put people back to work.”

Frankly, if I desire “work”, then I want to do it by my own choice and at my own leisure, increasingly freed from the enforced conformity and servitude of the existing system.

We should not be striving to provide more, and more, human work but rather more technological productive efficiency with augmented effective consumer purchasing-power capable of eliminating consumer debt and liquidating industrial costs in a timely manner.  Let robots do the work.  Tirelessly and without complaint, they perform the vast majority of it better than people can.

You want more work?  Then let’s have another war—or, better yet, continuous wars until we end up destroying the whole planet or all life upon it.

Indeed, the flaws in the current financial system provide a constant incentive for military war, which normally is just an extension of economic war. Unbalanced international trade is driven by the increasing inherent orthodox need to export—not to receive an equivalent of real wealth in return, but to capture financial credits from other nations to compensate for the internal intrinsic deficiency of consumer purchasing-power that exists in the domestic price-system of every nation.

Anyone who does not understand this compulsive destructive dynamic of the modern financial-economic system is totally unqualified even to comment on our economic position.

The abundance that technology makes possible should set men and women free from physical want, increasingly enabling them to choose independently and without duress their preferred activities in life. As opposed to the ubiquitous Keynesian, cognitively dissonant, counterfeit socialist concept of “economic democracy” as a centralized administrative proletarian Work-State, Social Credit gives real meaning to the concept of economic democracy by favoring a consumer-motivated system of production.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Basic income isn’t just a nice idea. It's a birthright
« Reply #52 on: March 13, 2017, 10:47:21 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/mar/04/basic-income-birthright-eliminating-poverty

Basic income isn’t just a nice idea. It's a birthright

Jason Hickel
The Guardian
March 04, 2017

Every student learns about Magna Carta, the ancient scroll that enshrined the rights of barons against the arbitrary authority of England’s monarchs. But most have never heard of its arguably more important twin, the Charter of the Forest, issued two years later in 1217. This short but powerful document guaranteed the rights of commoners to common lands, which they could use for farming, grazing, water and wood. It gave official recognition to a right that humans nearly everywhere had long just presupposed: that no one should be debarred from the resources necessary for livelihood.

But this right – the right of habitation – came under brutal attack beginning in the 15th century, when wealthy nobles began fencing off common lands for their own profit. Over the next few centuries, the enclosure movement, as it came to be known, shifted tens of millions of acres into private hands, displacing much of the country’s population. Excluded from the basic means of survival, most were left with no choice but to sell themselves for wages for the first time.

And it wasn’t only England. The same process unfolded across Asia and Africa and most of the global south as European colonisers staked private claim to lands and forests and waterways that were previously held in common, leaving millions dispossessed. In much of the colonial world the goal, or at least the effect, was to drive people into the capitalist labour market, where, in exchange for low wages and poor conditions, they and their descendants would power the mines, plantations and sweatshops for export to the west.

As the era of colonialism came to an end, the governments of many newly independent nations sought to reverse these patterns of historical dispossession with land reform programmes. But they were quickly forced to abandon this approach by big foreign landowners and international creditors. Instead, the new plan for eradicating poverty – the dream of development – came to hinge on drawing people ever deeper into the labour market. Jobs came to be hailed as the salvation of the poor: as the World Bank puts it, “jobs are the surest pathway out of poverty”.

But now this promise is beginning to look hollow. With the rise of robots, robust employment is no longer a realistic hope. We know that automation is a real threat to jobs in the global north, but the threat is much worse in the south. The main industries there, such as small electronics and textile manufacturing, are some of the easiest to automate. According to a United Nations report, up to two-thirds of jobs in developing countries could disappear in the near future.

This is all bitterly painful, particularly for the postcolonial world. First they were dispossessed of their land and promised jobs instead. Now they will be dispossessed of their jobs, and many will be left with literally no way to survive. Their dispossession will be absolute. Technological unemployment will almost certainly reverse the modest gains against poverty that have been made over the past few decades, and hunger will likely rise.

Governments are scrambling to respond, and they don’t have many options. But one stands out as by far the most promising: a universal basic income.

Once a fringe idea, basic income is now speeding its way into the public imagination. Finland is running a two-year experiment in basic income. Utrecht in the Netherlands is conducting a trial, too. Y Combinator is trying it out in Oakland in the US. Scotland looks likely to follow suit. And cash transfer programmes have already proven to be successful in Namibia, India and dozens of other developing countries, sparking what some scholars have billed as “a development revolution from the global south”. In Brazil, to cite just one example, cash transfers helped to cut poverty rates in half in less than a decade.

But the success of basic income – in both the north and the south – all depends on how we frame it. Will it be cast as a form of charity by the rich? Or will it be cast as a right for all?

Thomas Paine was among the first to argue that a basic income should be introduced as a kind of compensation for dispossession. In his brilliant 1797 pamphlet Agrarian Justice, he pointed out that “the earth, in its natural, uncultivated state was, and ever would have continued to be, the common property of the human race”. It was unfair that a few should enclose it for their own benefit, leaving the vast majority without their rightful inheritance. As far as Paine was concerned, this violated the most basic principles of justice.

Knowing that land reform would be politically impossible (for it would “derange any present possessors”), Paine proposed that those with property should pay a “ground rent” – a small tax on the yields of their land – into a fund that would then be distributed to everyone as unconditional basic income. For Paine, this would be a right: “justice, not charity”. It was a powerful idea, and it gained traction in the 19th century when American philosopher Henry George proposed a “land value tax” that would fund an annual dividend for every citizen.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline freedom_commonsense

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,034
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #53 on: March 14, 2017, 06:40:33 AM »
Nice article, until he starts talking about carbon tax and borderless payments further down.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #54 on: March 14, 2017, 09:24:53 AM »
Nice article, until he starts talking about carbon tax and borderless payments further down.

I know, I was disgusted when I saw that. But as I've been explaining for years, a universal basic income (aka guaranteed minimum income) need not be financed -- even in part -- by a tax on anything other than the economic rent of land.

As a long-time Georgist, I'm as opposed to carbon taxes as I am to wage and sales taxes.

I'm also opposed to totally open borders (as was Henry George), and to any kind of "global" taxing authority.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline freedom_commonsense

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,034
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #55 on: March 14, 2017, 09:27:38 AM »
I know, I was disgusted when I saw that. But as I've been explaining for years, a universal basic income (aka guaranteed minimum income) need not be financed -- even in part -- by a tax on anything other than the economic rent of land.

As a long-time Georgist, I'm as opposed to carbon taxes as I am to wage and sales taxes.

I'm also opposed to totally open borders (as was Henry George), and to any kind of "global" taxing authority.

Well it is a potential avenue for the LVT to be hijacked. Also without monetary reform, the debt problem will still exist. As you've said many times here, both must go hand-in-hand.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #56 on: March 14, 2017, 09:34:15 AM »
Well it is a potential avenue for the LVT to be hijacked.

There isn't any urgently needed public policy reform that isn't vulnerable to being hijacked to one extent or another.

Hence the need for eternal vigilance against would-be hijackers.

Quote
Also without monetary reform, the debt problem will still exist. As you've said many times here, both must go hand-in-hand.

No argument there.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline freedom_commonsense

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,034
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #57 on: March 14, 2017, 10:03:58 AM »
There isn't any urgently needed public policy reform that isn't vulnerable to being hijacked to one extent or another.

Hence the need for eternal vigilance against would-be hijackers.

Exactly, although the existence of schemes like Alaska's dividend is a positive sign.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Finland finds basic income reduces stress
« Reply #58 on: May 09, 2017, 09:35:27 AM »
I can hear Austrian School reactionaries already: "OMG! Finland is being turned into Venezuela!"  ::)

https://www.neweurope.eu/article/finland-finds-basic-income-reduces-stress/

Finland finds basic income reduces stress

By Beata Stur
New Europe
May 9, 2017

Citizens in Finland who receive a basic monthly income – part of a radical Finnish pilot programme – have experienced a reduction in their stress levels.

Under the scheme, which is the first of its kind in Europe, 2,000 people receive €560 every month for two years. According to government data, the average private sector income in Finland is €3,500.

Recipients do not have to report whether they are seeking employment or how they are spending the money, which is deducted from any benefits they are already receiving.

As reported by The Independent, Marjukka Turunen, head of KELA, the legal unit at Finland’s social insurance agency, said as well as cutting bureaucracy, reducing costs and tackling poverty, the scheme was having an indirectly positive effect on people’s mental health.

“There was this one woman who said: ‘I was afraid every time the phone would ring, that unemployment services are calling to offer me a job,’” Turunen told US-based broadcaster Kera News.

The woman was not able to work because she was caring for elderly parents.

She added: “This experiment really has an indirect impact, also, on the stress levels [of people] and the mental health and so on.”

Under the pilot, if a participant finds work, they will continue to receive the stipend, easing claimants’ fears they will lose out by finding employment.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,099
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Bureaucracy-Ridden Welfare System vs. Guaranteed Income
« Reply #59 on: July 19, 2017, 12:57:19 PM »
Remember how successfully establishment Republicans managed to co-opt (and ultimately derail) the anti-war, anti-Federal Reserve, Ron Paul-inspired "Tea Party" movement?

-- http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/tea-party-pacs-ideas-death-214164

I'm convinced that something similar is currently underway with regard to the "basic income" movement:

-----------------------------------------

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/07/05/mark-zuckerberg-praises-universal-basic-income-on-alaska-trip/103447704/

Mark Zuckerberg praises universal basic income on Alaska trip

Jessica Guynn
USA TODAY
July 5, 2017

SAN FRANCISCO — Mark Zuckerberg is talking up universal basic income — the guaranteed distribution of cash stipends to cover basic expenses — as a possible new safety net as technology automates more jobs, putting more people out of work.

In a Facebook post about a trip this week to Alaska with wife Priscilla Chan,  the Facebook CEO praised the state's Permanent Fund, which pools the state's oil revenue and pays out cash dividends to eligible Alaskans. In 2016, that dividend was $1,022.

"This is a novel approach to basic income in a few ways. First, it's funded by natural resources rather than raising taxes. Second, it comes from conservative principles of smaller government, rather than progressive principles of a larger safety net. This shows basic income is a bipartisan idea," Zuckerberg wrote.

He also highlighted a smaller dividend program for corporations that are owned and run by native Alaskans and sit on native land. Each year, the corporations pays out a dividend to shareholders, mostly natives.

Zuckerberg said Alaska's approach "may be a lesson for the rest of the country."

[Continued...]

-----------------------------------------

I cannot stress strongly enough that it's a virtual certainty that Zuckerberg is just as opposed to the National Emergency Employment Defense Act as are both Democratic and Republican politicians (including Trump!), because it puts private bankers out of the money-creation business -- and hence out of power:

-- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-zarlenga/sequesters-shutdowns-and-_b_4086071.html

-- http://www.monetary.org/occupying-the-need-act/2014/04

The banker-owned political establishment knows that, as AI robotics render human labor increasingly obsolete, the idea of a guaranteed minimum income (aka "universal basic income" or UBI) will become increasingly popular, and so is trying to preemptively hijack that movement in order to splice it with the completely separate ideas of a microchipped population and a global carbon tax.

Contrary to what reactionary ideologues would have everyone blindly believe, UBI not only need not be financed by raising either taxes or the national debt, but can actually be financed while simultaneously reducing both. How? By exerting round-the-clock pressure on Congress to pass (over a presidential veto, if necessary) the aforementioned bill.

But for that to happen, a critical mass of people must free their minds from the intellectual prison that is the pro-Trump-vs.-anti-Trump paradigm.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0