- 38,861
- 54,768
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Also recently read about the $70k CEO dude.I read a recent report, I believe it was the NY Times, which exposed that CEO for being sued by a co-founder, his own brother, for paying himself too much prior to that pay raise PR stunt.No it didn't, go read the recent reports.
It was a success
I don't think funding it would be a problem honestly,I believe most people's arguments against it would be more social than economic.I mean you did just say socialism is a policy from the right. I made that exact face.
I read a recent report, I believe it was the NY Times, which exposed that CEO for being sued by a co-founder, his own brother, for paying himself too much prior to that pay raise PR stunt.
Did everyone miss the part where it said this will cost $52B a year and their revenue is only $49B? Lol. The US has about $20 Trillion in debt. Applying this here is nothing short of delusional at this point. I will say that if the trillions we've spent on bailouts and stimulus and quantitative easing might have actually made a difference if it was injected directly into the economy in such a fashion. But of course you're gonna have inflation which would cause problems elsewhere in the economy. And at the end of the day welfare isn't gonna promote equality.
I don't think funding it would be a problem honestly,I believe most people's arguments against it would be more social than economic.I mean you did just say socialism is a policy from the right. I made that exact face.
I read a recent report, I believe it was the NY Times, which exposed that CEO for being sued by a co-founder, his own brother, for paying himself too much prior to that pay raise PR stunt.
Did everyone miss the part where it said this will cost $52B a year and their revenue is only $49B? Lol. The US has about $20 Trillion in debt. Applying this here is nothing short of delusional at this point. I will say that if the trillions we've spent on bailouts and stimulus and quantitative easing might have actually made a difference if it was injected directly into the economy in such a fashion. But of course you're gonna have inflation which would cause problems elsewhere in the economy. And at the end of the day welfare isn't gonna promote equality.
I am an economist and I support a basic income guarantee (or BIG). It would not discourage work, it would cause some inflation but poor people would still benefit on balance, cash is usually better than goods or vouchers for goods when it comes to welfare and a BIG would likely make recessions less severe and less prolonged. Furthermore, a BIG would allow people to be entrepreneurial and to develop better human capital, skills in other words.
I also support a BIG as a matter of political philosophy. We have private property in our society and it is, on balance, very beneficial. However private property does cost a lot in terms of money and it requires the deprivation or the threat of deprivation of liberty in order to be maintained. The police, the courts, the military all exist to make sure that a poor person cannot occupy a rich man's empty house or use his unused farm land or cut down his trees or otherwise make a living.
We use the power of state to make sure that wealthy people are far better off than they would be in a true state of nature. As a result, many people are worse off than they would be in a state of nature. Those people with only their labor deserve some compensation.
The fact is that the state makes sure that poor people do not tear up my vineyards and begin to engage in subsistence farming. I am grateful for that but I do believe that because I use the state to own far more land than I could physically control, I owe it to those poor people to make sure they have enough cash to in order to purchase adequate food, clothes and shelter.
Private property is a social construct and it is no more or no less legitimate than ensuring that every citizen has a certain minimum level of purchasing power through out their lives. This may sound like the stuff of Karl Marx but MLK, Milton Friedman, Thomas Paine and a whole host thinkers from across the political spectrum all have more or less endorsed a basic minimum income.
Closing of corporate tax loop holes,national legalization and taxation of marijuana,a small national sales tax etc....These would all raise plenty of funds.How would it not be a problem, do you realize we are on the verge of an economic **** storm? The good times are over.
All plans for economic stimulus that don't give the money directly to the people there are trying to stimulate will fail. People are greedy by nature. Most of the economic stimulus has gone straight to big corporations that marked the era as some of their highest earning record profit periods.
So these big institutions act no different than your uninformed college freshman that got a refund check.
Ahhhh has no comeback
So the weak meme usage begins
Never change famb
I mean you did just say socialism is a policy from the right. I made that exact face.
No it didn't, go read the recent reports.
It was a success
I read a recent report, I believe it was the NY Times, which exposed that CEO for being sued by a co-founder, his own brother, for paying himself too much prior to that pay raise PR stunt.
Did everyone miss the part where it said this will cost $52B a year and their revenue is only $49B? Lol. The US has about $20 Trillion in debt. Applying this here is nothing short of delusional at this point. I will say that if the trillions we've spent on bailouts and stimulus and quantitative easing might have actually made a difference if it was injected directly into the economy in such a fashion. But of course you're gonna have inflation which would cause problems elsewhere in the economy. And at the end of the day welfare isn't gonna promote equality.
Let this happen in the U.S Jordan's would cost $1300 a pair .