Universal Basic Income; 'bout time or batshit crazy?

SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
esh dov ets said:
it's not an increase in welfare. it's basic income, universal because it's a universal right to live ok. you don't pay for air and you shouldn't pay to drink water.
Click to expand...
You're abusing the commonly accepted usage of the term.

It's called Universal Basic Income because it is received universally.

How many times have I said it's tokenism because we take it straight back off the rich with a tax hike?

In order for something to work you need everyone to accept it. People begrudgingly accepted Obamacare because it affected everyone and then they started to like it.
 
esh dov ets

esh dov ets

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
You're abusing the commonly accepted usage of the term.

It's called Universal Basic Income because it is received universally.

How many times have I said it's tokenism because we take it straight back off the rich with a tax hike?

In order for something to work you need everyone to accept it. People begrudgingly accepted Obamacare because it affected everyone and then they started to like it.
Click to expand...
people aren't dumb enough to not notice when you take more than you give. if you take the same as you give it's pointless. i believe you are thinking more like a politician than i am.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
The Australian tax system is very progressive in that it taxes those making the least amount of money at the lowest rates. .
Click to expand...
Not correct ttystikk, The lowest group is $18200 and under. This group does not pay anything at all. I think thats a good thing for two reasons. 1. these people are working and not earning much at all. They dont deserve to be taxed.- yet. 2. Any disposable money those people have is spent. Spent money pays tax's.

But you are correct with your meaning, i thought id just clarify as it could be taken as all low income earners pay income tax.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
esh dov ets said:
people aren't dumb enough to not notice when you take more than you give. if you take the same as you give it's pointless. i believe you are thinking more like a politician than i am.
Click to expand...
It's not about them being dumb, it's about the principle of the act.

Universal means universal means universal, you're playing word salad.

If you're not talking about UBI in the commonly accepted meaning then use a different term.

Call it "Welfare on Steroids" or something instead.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
esh dov ets said:
it's not an increase in welfare. it's basic income, universal because it's a universal right to live ok. you don't pay for air and you shouldn't pay to drink water.
Click to expand...
Coming from a Conservative near you in the not to distant future. http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1999240 Fresh air..in a can.

"Japanese consumers seem to have taken a liking to O2 pick-me-up products. About 3,000 cans of O2 Supli were sold in a single business day, according to 7-Eleven Japan"
 
esh dov ets

esh dov ets

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
It's not about them being dumb, it's about the principle of the act.

Universal means universal means universal, you're playing word salad.

If you're not talking about UBI in the commonly accepted meaning then use a different term.
.
Click to expand...
If you want good principles, try honesty, being upfront, being fair, not wasting
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
esh dov ets said:
If you want good principles, try honesty, being upfront, being fair, not wasting
Click to expand...
I've been completely honest and "fairness" is subjective.

And you're the one misusing the name for a pre-defined concept to suit your personal ideals and you're wasting time if you think people will accept a non-universal universal basic income.

The people not getting it simply won't go along with it and theyre the ones ultimately paying for it.

Again, because you can't seem to accept it, I support UBI if it's universal, like common sense and it's name implies.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Lucky Luke said:
Not correct ttystikk, The lowest group is $18200 and under. This group does not pay anything at all. I think thats a good thing for two reasons. 1. these people are working and not earning much at all. They dont deserve to be taxed.- yet. 2. Any disposable money those people have is spent. Spent money pays tax's.

But you are correct with your meaning, i thought id just clarify as it could be taken as all low income earners pay income tax.
Click to expand...
I think we're saying the same thing. No tax for the lowest group, taxes increase as income rises. That's an example of progressive taxation.

I think that those making over half a million or do should be paying 65% on their top national rate. They can certainly afford it.

In addition, the should be caps on deductions like the mortgage deduction, so it doesn't go to finance multi-million dollar homes.

There should be no cap on social security, this to ensure it's properly funded.

Republicans in America have spent the last half century or more chipping away at the idea that everyone owes taxes to their country for all it provides them and that paying taxes is how we all have a better country.

Instead, they talk about fraud and waste- and then create lots of fraud and waste! (Dems do too, not saying they don't) Instead of being held accountable for these crimes against our people, they use them as excuses not to pay taxes. This is despicable, immoral and tears at the fabric of our nation's stability.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I think we're saying the same thing. No tax for the lowest group, taxes increase as income rises. That's an example of progressive taxation.

I think that those making over half a million or do should be paying 65% on their top national rate. They can certainly afford it.

In addition, the should be caps on deductions like the mortgage deduction, so it doesn't go to finance multi-million dollar homes.

There should be no cap on social security, this to ensure it's properly funded.

Republicans in America have spent the last half century or more chipping away at the idea that everyone owes taxes to their country for all it provides them and that paying taxes is how we all have a better country.

Instead, they talk about fraud and waste- and then create lots of fraud and waste! (Dems do too, not saying they don't) Instead of being held accountable for these crimes against our people, they use them as excuses not to pay taxes. This is despicable, immoral and tears at the fabric of our nation's stability.
Click to expand...

I liked the Australian tax rates somebody posted the other day. If I understood it correctly, nobody would ever be stuck in the low end of a higher tax rate. I think that would satisfy most people needs in our country.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
I liked the Australian tax rates somebody posted the other day. If I understood it correctly, nobody would ever be stuck in the low end of a higher tax rate. I think that would satisfy most people needs in our country.
Click to expand...
I saw the same thing and liked the approach a lot.

It treats people with respect, something our Federal Government seems to have forgotten how to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top