- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
It didn't have mixed reviews. It failed plain and simple.
Is Finland onto something with this proposal? Vol. Universal Basic Income
It didn't have mixed reviews. It failed plain and simple.
- 23,496
- 38,031
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2013
How much do they spend on other benefit packages annually?
I could see the potential for it to work on a small scale economy like Finland if overspending on welfare can be shown to have lead to the poor state of affairs over there.
I could see the potential for it to work on a small scale economy like Finland if overspending on welfare can be shown to have lead to the poor state of affairs over there.
Last edited:
- 3,075
- 2,596
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
Europe getting the Multicultural D tho.
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
Last edited:
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
Ahhhh has no comeback
So the weak meme usage begins
Never change famb
Comeback? Lol hell I look like debating idiotic what if scenarios that will never happen? Lol go find steezy or someone to get into it with.
The economic issues of America go hand in hand with many social issues of the nation, tiny nordic nations that arent even as diverse or populated as the LA metro area can not be compared to anything going on in America.
When I say comeback I referring to your meme. I wasn't trying to debate anything, I was trying to discuss something, and I simply disagree with you on a point
I'm saying you couldn't find a more clever way to shade my post, so you resort to a over used meme
And I find it hilarious you of all people wanna call me out for liking to arguing, when you almost got put on the Summer Jam screen for your antics.
So relax b.
- 14,997
- 4,264
- Joined
- May 26, 2003
When I say comeback I referring to your meme. I wasn't trying to debate anything, I was trying to discuss something, and I simply disagree with you on a point
I'm saying you couldn't find a more clever way to shade my post, so you resort to a over used meme
And I find it hilarious you of all people wanna call me out for liking to arguing, when you almost got put on the Summer Jam screen for your antics.
So relax b.
Summer jam screen? I can give a damn what NT Circle jerk crews feel about me, all dudes do is hit the report button. And either way lames forming into voltron to feel their word is law is clown stuff which is why now I let you dudes have it.
Like I said, my comment is it is idiotic to compare a nation that is less populated and less diverse than a US city/metro area as if they have the answers. The dymanics of poverty in the US are completly different than any nordic nation.
- 21,632
- 10,251
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
The most recent things i heard about it was it was stable. They lost two employees right off the bat who didn't agree that were high up in the company but they rebounded from the initial shock.
And Lucky i def agree with your point. I just dont know what would happen if you put this policy in place in the US. I am interested on peoples thoughts on if it would work anywhere and why?
Like this can have correlations to raising the minimum wage in the US. So to me id like to see how it works in Finland and try to extrapolate some of the lessons learned to be used other places
Last edited:
- 9,995
- 3,286
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2015
Finland's education system > US. This is another sensible move they're making that the US won't
- 14,997
- 4,264
- Joined
- May 26, 2003
Policies like that could maybe work in a place like dakota or somthing which does not have a diverse population thus there are less variables for their economic issues but it def could not work in say NY State because the economic dymanics in Buffalo are TOTALLY diff than NYC. Too many factors in the history and make up the US that got us where we are today than cant be compared to any other nation.
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
When I say comeback I referring to your meme. I wasn't trying to debate anything, I was trying to discuss something, and I simply disagree with you on a point
I'm saying you couldn't find a more clever way to shade my post, so you resort to a over used meme
And I find it hilarious you of all people wanna call me out for liking to arguing, when you almost got put on the Summer Jam screen for your antics.
So relax b.
Summer jam screen? I can give a damn what NT Circle jerk crews feel about me, all dudes do is hit the report button. And either way lames forming into voltron to feel their word is law is clown stuff which is why now I let you dudes have it.
Like I said, my comment is it is idiotic to compare a nation that is less populated and less diverse than a US city/metro area as if they have the answers. The dymanics of poverty in the US are completly different than any nordic nation.
-Everyone got their post deleted from that, not just you. Mods did that you so you won't get aired out. I dunno how you interpret those events as the "NT circle jerk crew hitting the report button"
If you wanna ignore everything else I write, go ahead, maybe it will serve as a jumping off point for a discussion with someone else. Even though it is aimed at you
-------------
-Yes the dynamics of poverty are different in America, I agree, but the economics behind this program can still work in America in a different form. They are doing this to incentivize people going back to work, since their unemployment rates are so high. America's problem is the participation rate it the major issue.
Both countries are trying to maximize the same thing, just that their constraints are different, some of which aren't just racial (like tax rates already in place). I want to have the discussion about how we can achieve the same outcome as Finland, while considering out unique constraints.
America can do the same by giving the working poor a tax cut through cutting payroll taxes and uncapping them. That way making it way less regressive, all you would see a ton of efficiency gains, especially focused around the working poor. Secondly we have the EIC, when both parties support increasing greatly. The argument is how is it paid for.
Finland's new law doesn't have a benefit reduction rate built in too it, while America's EIC does. One of the reason AFDC became such a problem, because there was a poverty trap built into the benefit reduction rate
Finland system since it is so wide spread, it might not have the same distortionary affect
See famb, I was more than willing to calmly chop it up about the economics of this bill, how it could disproportionately help the working poor, and as a result disproportionately help black folk. While I do agree that economics policy plays into social policy. Because modern day white supremacy is about economically disadvantaging minorities more than anything else.
It has come to the point where it is claiming to many victims in the dominant society for it carry on much longer it it's current form, because equal participation in social programs in mostly insured in America. So to me is the back door to get policies that can help black folk passed.
So that's why I think just dismissing how Noridc and other more homogeneous nationals do economics and organize industries is short sighted.
There are plenty lessons to be learned. Matter of fact, I'm willing to guess if someone ran the numbers this system might cost around than our current welfare system. And if something cost the same and gives better results, why shouldn't we consider it, or at least have the discussion.
Especially since these are laws that we might have to pass in a couple decades anyway
So you see, I was not just looking for an argument.
Both countries are trying to maximize the same thing, just that their constraints are different, some of which aren't just racial (like tax rates already in place). I want to have the discussion about how we can achieve the same outcome as Finland, while considering out unique constraints.
America can do the same by giving the working poor a tax cut through cutting payroll taxes and uncapping them. That way making it way less regressive, all you would see a ton of efficiency gains, especially focused around the working poor. Secondly we have the EIC, when both parties support increasing greatly. The argument is how is it paid for.
Finland's new law doesn't have a benefit reduction rate built in too it, while America's EIC does. One of the reason AFDC became such a problem, because there was a poverty trap built into the benefit reduction rate
Finland system since it is so wide spread, it might not have the same distortionary affect
See famb, I was more than willing to calmly chop it up about the economics of this bill, how it could disproportionately help the working poor, and as a result disproportionately help black folk. While I do agree that economics policy plays into social policy. Because modern day white supremacy is about economically disadvantaging minorities more than anything else.
It has come to the point where it is claiming to many victims in the dominant society for it carry on much longer it it's current form, because equal participation in social programs in mostly insured in America. So to me is the back door to get policies that can help black folk passed.
So that's why I think just dismissing how Noridc and other more homogeneous nationals do economics and organize industries is short sighted.
There are plenty lessons to be learned. Matter of fact, I'm willing to guess if someone ran the numbers this system might cost around than our current welfare system. And if something cost the same and gives better results, why shouldn't we consider it, or at least have the discussion.
Especially since these are laws that we might have to pass in a couple decades anyway
So you see, I was not just looking for an argument.
My general feelings about this in America:
Unless the numbers comeback it will save America money, I wouldn't be inclined to support this in the US. Even though I prefer more general solutions
I believe there are more targeted stuff we can do in the interim, as we transition to a more equitable system.
Nordic countries have had decades upon decades to get their act together. America can't just jump into something like this head first
Last edited:
- 42,182
- 43,968
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- 14,997
- 4,264
- Joined
- May 26, 2003
-Everyone got their post deleted from that, not just you. Mods did that you so you won't get aired out. I dunno how you interpret those events as the "NT circle jerk crew hitting the report button"
If you wanna ignore everything else I write, go ahead, maybe it will serve as a jumping off point for a discussion with someone else. Even though it is aimed at you
-------------
--------Yes the dynamics of poverty are different in America, I agree, but the economics behind this program can still work in America in a different form. They are doing this to incentivize people going back to work, since their unemployment rates are so high. America's problem is the participation rate it the major issue.
Both countries are trying to maximize the same thing, just that their constraints are different, some of which aren't just racial (like tax rates already in place). I want to have the discussion about how we can achieve the same outcome as Finland, while considering out unique constraints.
America can do the same by giving the working poor a tax cut through cutting payroll taxes and uncapping them. That way making it way less regressive, all you would see a ton of efficiency gains, especially focused around the working poor. Secondly we have the EIC, when both parties support increasing greatly. The argument is how is it paid for.
Finland's new law doesn't have a benefit reduction rate built in too it, while America's EIC does. One of the reason AFDC became such a problem, because there was a poverty trap built into the benefit reduction rate
Finland system since it is so wide spread, it might not have the same distortionary affect
See famb, I was more than willing to calmly chop it up about the economics of this bill, how it could disproportionately help the working poor, and as a result disproportionately help black folk. While I do agree that economics policy plays into social policy. Because modern day white supremacy is about economically disadvantaging minorities more than anything else.
It has come to the point where it is claiming to many victims in the dominant society for it carry on much longer it it's current form, because equal participation in social programs in mostly insured in America. So to me is the back door to get policies that can help black folk passed.
So that's why I think just dismissing how Noridc and other more homogeneous nationals do economics and organize industries is short sighted.
There are plenty lessons to be learned. Matter of fact, I'm willing to guess if someone ran the numbers this system might cost around than our current welfare system. And if something cost the same and gives better results, why shouldn't we consider it, or at least have the discussion.
Especially since these are laws that we might have to pass in a couple decades anyway
So you see, I was not just looking for an argument.
My general feelings about this in America:
Unless the numbers comeback it will save America money, I wouldn't be inclined to support this in the US. Even though I prefer more general solutions
I believe there are more targeted stuff we can do in the interim, as we transition to a more equitable system.
Nordic countries have had decades upon decades to get their act together. America can't just jump into something like this head first
When has policy of a homogeneous society ever work for one that wasnt let alone 8x the pop size. If anything the argument could stand the simple reason certain policies work in these places are because there are less variables in the daily lives of their citizens thus "universal law" can be had with little hiccups. Like I said there are way too many variables in the US population make up to make such lazy "hey it worked here it will work there" comparisons.
- 69,564
- 106,049
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2010
It didn't, a few arrogant, selfish dolts having a problem with a receptionist making the same as them is not a failure. A goofball *** broad saying she didn't earn that raise isn't a failure. For the economic effect he was looking to achieve, it seems to be working well, the few with personal issues against it aside.
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
-Everyone got their post deleted from that, not just you. Mods did that you so you won't get aired out. I dunno how you interpret those events as the "NT circle jerk crew hitting the report button"
If you wanna ignore everything else I write, go ahead, maybe it will serve as a jumping off point for a discussion with someone else. Even though it is aimed at you
-------------
--------Yes the dynamics of poverty are different in America, I agree, but the economics behind this program can still work in America in a different form. They are doing this to incentivize people going back to work, since their unemployment rates are so high. America's problem is the participation rate it the major issue.
Both countries are trying to maximize the same thing, just that their constraints are different, some of which aren't just racial (like tax rates already in place). I want to have the discussion about how we can achieve the same outcome as Finland, while considering out unique constraints.
America can do the same by giving the working poor a tax cut through cutting payroll taxes and uncapping them. That way making it way less regressive, all you would see a ton of efficiency gains, especially focused around the working poor. Secondly we have the EIC, when both parties support increasing greatly. The argument is how is it paid for.
Finland's new law doesn't have a benefit reduction rate built in too it, while America's EIC does. One of the reason AFDC became such a problem, because there was a poverty trap built into the benefit reduction rate
Finland system since it is so wide spread, it might not have the same distortionary affect
See famb, I was more than willing to calmly chop it up about the economics of this bill, how it could disproportionately help the working poor, and as a result disproportionately help black folk. While I do agree that economics policy plays into social policy. Because modern day white supremacy is about economically disadvantaging minorities more than anything else.
It has come to the point where it is claiming to many victims in the dominant society for it carry on much longer it it's current form, because equal participation in social programs in mostly insured in America. So to me is the back door to get policies that can help black folk passed.
So that's why I think just dismissing how Noridc and other more homogeneous nationals do economics and organize industries is short sighted.
There are plenty lessons to be learned. Matter of fact, I'm willing to guess if someone ran the numbers this system might cost around than our current welfare system. And if something cost the same and gives better results, why shouldn't we consider it, or at least have the discussion.
Especially since these are laws that we might have to pass in a couple decades anyway
So you see, I was not just looking for an argument.
My general feelings about this in America:
Unless the numbers comeback it will save America money, I wouldn't be inclined to support this in the US. Even though I prefer more general solutions
I believe there are more targeted stuff we can do in the interim, as we transition to a more equitable system.
Nordic countries have had decades upon decades to get their act together. America can't just jump into something like this head first
When has policy of a homogeneous society ever work for one that wasnt let alone 8x the pop size. If anything the argument could stand the simple reason certain policies work in these places are because there are less variables in the daily lives of their citizens thus "universal law" can be had with little hiccups. Like I said there are way too many variables in the US population make up to make such lazy "hey it worked here it will work there" comparisons.
Uhh?
And where in my post did I say "hey it worked here it will work there" argument. I even say we should not do what Finland is doing, and give American specific policies that would achieve the similar goals.
I even admit we shouldn't try it, because but there are other solutions. Finland wants to encourage folk to get back to work, America wants the same thing. So what can a country like America do to achieve that?
I'm just saying the problem is not with the policies itself, it is with the people work hard to sabotage policies that will lead to problems. If that's want you're saying then fine, I agree. I mean look at the ACA, and what was proposed, to what was passed, to how it is continuously attacked.
But things like universal healthcare, strong union coverage, effective public transportation, equal schools, and subsidized higher education can work in America is the policy is written well, it is implemented fairly.
It won't look like Nordic countries sure. But even those "homogeneous" societies don't all do things the same. There are even states within America I feel we should be looking at too.
America had it's biggest period of shared prosperity when it laws mirrored current day Europe the most . The problem was discrimination and lack of equal participation. America transitioned away from them when then were forced to included minorities in the system.
But if you can ensure equal participation, and by no means I'm saying this is a given, but it is much harder in a post Civil rights world, then these equitable programs can still work imo. People in the dominant society will benefit from them too. The problem is generally with their implementation. I only times in history where bigoted whites put their hate aside for a second is when the faced an economic crisis, and their fate was directly tied to cooperating with African Americans. And with the issues facing that community today, we are on a slow march to that having on a large scale, so it presents and opportunity for policies like these to be on the table. Before thee economic crisis comes
Last edited:
- 3,732
- 542
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
I would love to see something like this at least attempted in this country.
- 30,246
- 40,598
- Joined
- May 25, 2004
I remember I got an Obama check for something. It was like 300 bucks. Everyone who was broke got one or something.
- 22,101
- 16,345
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
- 697
- 56
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2010
I've always been curious about the US Flat Tax proposal by some candidates
- 21
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2012
Why does racial/ social/ economic diversity mean that a system like Finland's won't work? Perhaps if more "universal" laws were passed that didn't "segregate" folks, there'd be less "diversity".
#genuinequestions
#genuinequestions
- 27,785
- 12,449
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
- 4,042
- 1,180
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
I wouldn't mind the move
- 16,543
- 7,757
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2013
So what's the problem? It's basically free money and doesn't have any effect on what a citizen makes in his / her regular job, right?
- 44,205
- 2,535
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
Thats not bad.
- 44,205
- 2,535
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
Thats not bad.
- 5,974
- 9,840
- Joined
- May 20, 2006
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.
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.
Last edited:
