~*Official Utterly Useless Old Woman, AOC, and UBI Thread*~

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

13 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

I'm generally in favor of less administrative overhead for this stuff but you could greatly reduce the cost of this program by making it so that you get $(1,000 - current monthly income) per month. This way there's no cliff as it's a dollar-for-dollar dropoff as your income increases up to $1,000 a month, but you're greatly reducing the UBI-elegible population.

 

One of the problems is that if you went this route then you'd likely get people insisting on including a clause that if your income the year winds up going up beyond what the monthly payments were initially based on (say because you got a job mid-year) that you have to pay the money back, which would be a gigantic mess.

The solution could be to make the determination with based on the filing of a tax document that reports previous year's AGI.

 

In effect, the benefit would be for the previous tax year, but will be paid in the current year.  That way, there would never really be a case where the benefits would need to be repaid.

[legend]

1 hour ago, SFLUFAN said:

Let me go a bit further to illustrate my "hardline" opposition.

 

Let's assume a UBI that guarantees an income floor of $1,000/month or $12,000 per annum.  This rate would effectively swallow the entire US Federal budget (both discretionary and mandatory) which is currently $4.2 trillion.  This means that to preserve social programs in a manner that they are not negatively impacted by UBI's existence, we'd essentially have to start at zero.

 

Because we will need to raise more revenue, this means more taxes.  Of course, we're gonna "soak the rich" (which should be done anyway!), but that's not going to be enough.  A national VAT will have to be instituted to bring in revenue.  However, a VAT is an inherently regressive tax which means that the benefits of the UBI for those it is most intended to assist are either significantly reduced or even wiped out by the VAT.

 

In essence, what have I really accomplished?

 

How are you calculating the cost consuming everything? If you're just saying "x amount for n people in the US" that's not a good measure. I've seen a few economists bulk when people argue against UBI for that reason because your tax system wouldn't work that way. You have to look at the net exchange and any good plan would still have that be more than positive for most people: in effect only the people who need an UBI would be the ones receiving  it.

 

This is also the reason people have suggested a negative tax being a simpler way to frame it though, because you don't have to juggle the additional tax system in your head while maintaining the same net exchange of UBI with an adjusted tax system.

 

I don't see why national VAT is the only alternative (or rather extension) to taxing the rich.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

2 minutes ago, legend said:

 

How are you calculating the cost consuming everything? If you're just saying "x amount for n people in the US" that's not a good measure. I've seen a few economists bulk when people argue against UBI for that reason because your tax system wouldn't work that way. You have to look at the net exchange and any good plan would still have that be more than positive for most people.

 

This is also the reason people have suggested a negative tax being a simpler way to frame it though, because you don't have to juggle the additional tax system in your head while maintaining the same net exchange of UBI with an adjusted tax system.

 

I don't see why national VAT is the only alternative to taxing the rich.

 

Yes, I am using that as a measure to give a sense of the scale of the  additional costs that are being mooted, being well aware that it's about as "rough" as you can get.  I am using the national VAT as that has been suggested as the most efficient measure to fund national UBI in addition to "soaking the rich".

[Guest]

Recapture of excess payments is probably the easiest of all guaranteed income issues to solve  

[Jason]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

Recapture of excess payments is probably the easiest of all guaranteed income issues to solve  

 

Because people making below $12k are definitely saving money and could easily make the repayment if necessary, right?

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Because people making below $12k are definitely saving money and could easily make the repayment if necessary, right?

The answer is that tax rates take care of the issue. As your income increases beyond whatever income level is decided upon, the guaranteed income is siphoned back out. 

 

Everybody gets the chevk, and tax rates sort it out. No need for repaying anything.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

7 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Because people making below $12k are definitely saving money and could easily make the repayment if necessary, right?

Just get a small million dollar loan from your father to cover it

[legend]

2 hours ago, SFLUFAN said:

 

Yes, I am using that as a measure to give a sense of the scale of the  additional costs that are being mooted, being well aware that it's about as "rough" as you can get.  I am using the national VAT as that has been suggested as the most efficient measure to fund national UBI in addition to "soaking the rich".

 

Okay, well I think then we need some better estimates that account for tax changes because I think that estimate is going to be *substantially* off and we can't say much from it. 

[Jason]

Do we like the title modification?

[RedSoxFan9]

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

4 minutes ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

 

For reference, Massie is a Republican.

[RedSoxFan9]

 

next gen Republicans 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Highly recommended piece

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Quote

This has not, of course, stopped her from fundraising off of it. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee donor inboxes are littered with appeals signed by the speaker to, all caps, stop Trump, as if the critical brake mechanisms are being controlled by donors and not by the officials whose elections they support. It’s like watching a person drown while the lifeguard sits in her tower, performatively noting with alarm that someone is sinking into the sea and surely someone—someone!—must save the swimmer. 

 

[RedSoxFan9]

 

[ort]

I remember when this story blew up and everyone was talking about the reactions to her comments, but it was really hard to find what she even said. I had to spend a while even finding it and then I had to keep looking because I kept scratching my head and asking... "Uh, this can't be it? Right? This is all she said?" It's all such bullshit. It's dangerous dishonest political theater aimed at his ignorant moronic army of morons who are apparently incapable of critical thought.

 

I have so little respect for anyone who still supports Trump. You would just have to be the stupidest dipshit in the world at this point to still support him. Just a fucking human hobgoblin of ignorant ignorance wrapped in a blanket of hate. Fuck anyone who supports him.

[ort]

I also feel like about half of the lead stories on Fox News over the last few months has been about members of "the squad". They are terrified of these women and have slid into full on stupid mode.

 

Watching Fox News is like slipping into some alternate reality where everyone in the world is a hateful idiot. Its really scary how far they've slid down this road. I know we've all just grown to accept it, but it really is a dangerous to have this large of a chunk getting news that's this openly and brazenly deceptive.

[Firewithin]

 

How many time do you think nance told her to know her place?

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

7 minutes ago, Firewithin said:

 

How many time do you think nance told her to know her place?

Probably as many times as she cited “how things are done”

[Guest]

“Israel hypnotizes the world” is a totally normal non-anti-Semitic thing to say @ort  

[Ghost_MH]

34 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

“Israel hypnotizes the world” is a totally normal non-anti-Semitic thing to say @ort  

 

One thing I will say is that it is ridiculous to suggest that a country cannot be criticized because doing so is racist. Where is the separation here?

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

29 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

One thing I will say is that it is ridiculous to suggest that a country cannot be criticized because doing so is racist. Where is the separation here?

The use of the term "hypnotize" in refence to Jews contains an anti-Semitic trope stretching back to the Middle Ages so it was a very poor choice of words to use in criticizing Israel, the ostensibly Jewish state.

 

Having said that, allowing the existence of the State of Israel is the biggest historical blunder in about 500 years or so.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

 

[thewhyteboar]

What a joke. Rand is everything wrong with the GOP:

1. Dumb as a rock

2. Zero consistency 

3. Fakes fiscal responsibility 

4. Owes his position entirely to nepotism

5. Racist as hell

6. Incredibly stupid

7. Given all that, the media grants credence to whatever he says, so he is treated like a Serious Legislator despite being a clown.

[Remarkableriots]

Quote

This isn’t a theoretical roadblock to impeachment. Earlier in July, the House voted on whether to consider impeaching Trump. A majority of House Democrats voted to table, or set aside, a resolution brought by Rep. Al Green (D-Tex.) calling for Trump’s impeachment.

It’s important to remember this wasn’t an impeachment vote. It was a procedural motion on whether to consider an impeachment vote, and 137 of the 235 House Democrats voted against it. Translated: When push came to shove, a majority didn’t even want to consider voting for impeachment. That’s why, even with nearly half of House Democrats supporting an inquiry, impeachment isn’t imminent.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/nearly-half-of-house-democrats-support-impeachment-but-that-doesn-t-mean-it-s-imminent/ar-AAF1LJ9?ocid=AMZN

[Greatoneshere]

On 7/26/2019 at 3:56 PM, sblfilms said:

“Israel hypnotizes the world” is a totally normal non-anti-Semitic thing to say @ort  

 

Sure, but she's not even close to anti-Semitic. The fact the right keeps pushing that says more about them than it does Ilhan Omar. And her point is still well-taken regardless. Israel's government, particularly it's conservative, xenophobic, right-wing one, does seem to have the major powers of the world under its thumb.

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Sure, but she's not even close to anti-Semitic. The fact the right keeps pushing that says more about them than it does Ilhan Omar. And her point is still well-taken regardless. Israel's government, particularly it's conservative, xenophobic, right-wing one, does seem to have the major powers of the world under its thumb.

That isn’t what she said. At best you can say it was an accident, but that’s naive.

[Kal-El814]

On 7/28/2019 at 10:47 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

I would happily buy Rand a ticket to go back to Ron’s nutsack. 

[Greatoneshere]

6 hours ago, sblfilms said:

That isn’t what she said. At best you can say it was an accident, but that’s naive.

 

That is certainly part of the broader point she was making in terms of all the misunderstood "quotes" that have been put out without context. Even the most charitable reading towards your point would make the conclusion that Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite a huge stretch, so the point remains, no?

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

I'm totally cool with giving Omar's anti-Jewish sentiments a pass simply because she's a black Muslim.

 

For anyone hyperventilating about how that's a double-standard that I'd never apply to a white Christian, I'll save you the trouble by saying (a) yes, that's absolutely correct and (b) I seriously don't care that it is.

[LazyPiranha]

3 hours ago, SFLUFAN said:

I'm totally cool with giving Omar's anti-Jewish sentiments a pass simply because she's a black Muslim.

 

For anyone hyperventilating about how that's a double-standard that I'd never apply to a white Christian, I'll save you the trouble by saying (a) yes, that's absolutely correct and (b) I seriously don't care that it is.

He's tough, but fair.

[Signifyin(g)Monkey]

On 7/28/2019 at 9:47 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

Kind of sad how Rand Paul seems to have become just another red meat conservative.  I was kind of hoping he’d become an authentic ‘new’ libertarian voice in the party who would avoid focusing on narrow flashpoints of cultural conflict in the name of laissez faire.  In retrospect I should have known better given the current  political environment, but oh well.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

8 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

I would happily buy Rand a ticket to go back to Ron’s nutsack. 

I feel like there are two paths for how this could go, and I’m ok with either of them. 

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

That is certainly part of the broader point she was making in terms of all the misunderstood "quotes" that have been put out without context. Even the most charitable reading towards your point would make the conclusion that Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite a huge stretch, so the point remains, no?

 

Why use anti-Semitic language (Israel is hypnotizing the world) towards a nation comprised largely of Jews if you aren’t to some degree anti-Semitic.

 

Might one say there is a sliding scale of anti-semitism  

[Greatoneshere]

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

 

Why use anti-Semitic language (Israel is hypnotizing the world) towards a nation comprised largely of Jews if you aren’t to some degree anti-Semitic.

 

Might one say there is a sliding scale of anti-semitism  

 

There's definitely a sliding scale haha - but at worst Ilhan Omar's comments were mis-informed/ignorant at best. She's apologized for the comments to boot, and her underlying commentary remains accurate. A person can accidentally say the wrong words but not mean them in the negative implication one could take them in.

 

I very much doubt Ilhan Omar is a straight out and out anti-Semite. And the fact we're more focused on her and her few comments that could be read in that direction over the blatant and rampant anti-Semitism of the right as well as the vicious policies of Israel towards Palestinians means we've lost all sense of proportion and fairness.