Posted on 12/27/2017 6:22:44 PM PST by confederatecarpetbag
Advocates of universal basic income believe that the unconditional offer of a regular, though tiny, sum of money could help many get back on their feet, and even encourage them to invest in new business ideas.
However, people from both sides of the political aisle have engaged with the proposal, which would cost money upfront but could deliver important savings by replacing unemployment benefits...
(Excerpt) Read more at futurism.com ...
“Advocates of universal basic income believe that the unconditional offer of a regular, though tiny, sum of money could help many get back on their feet, and even encourage them to invest in new business ideas.”
The leftist always confuse desired consequences with unintended consequences. What they want to happen will be the exact opposite of what will happen.
They are the most obtuse when it comes to understanding and accepting human nature.
The other thing to note is that the premise they use to foist this stupidity on people is that robots are going to take all the jobs and people wont have any, which is pure idiocy, but they figure it will bamboozle enough people (aided by free money) that they’ll get it through.
Universal Basic Income is another fraud that attracts world migration & socialism.
Universal Money Protection from the State is required. The State destroys the money supply.
See Mayflower Compact....
. . . which will never be “enough.” It can’t be, because it is universal, and therefore not earned and, as such, cannot be a source of gratitude but only of resentment. And as Dennis Prager points out, that means it cannot be a source of happiness.
Actually, the universal income is more useful than the current means-tested benefits system. I established my own business 2.5 years ago after losing my job. I was able to establish my business and take risks because my profit wasn’t subjected to being taken off me for working. Many are discouraged from establishing businesses or even getting a job because of the benefits they would lose. This not only reduces adminstration costs, it encourages enterprise and job seeking. The basic income may cover the essentials, but it isn’t going to give you a nice life, you would still have to work to enjoy the nicer things in life.
As for UBI, it's a kooky idea, regardless of who or how many believe it.
“Conservatism” *used* to be the place where adults would debate issues, based on principle. Simply dismissing ideas was the exclusive domain of the left. This has clearly changed, to, in my opinion, the detriment of all. Self-proclaimed conservatives are now as childish in their arguments as the left used to be.
One of the things that attracted me to conservatism was this issue, and the drug issue. I got an economics degree from a college that was decidedly liberal, but which had a conservative economics department. The *only* place at that school where I felt that real, honest, vigorous, intellectual debate occurred was the economics department. Whereas issues like drug legalization occurred throughout the college, in the economics department the argument was clearly not made out of self-interest (the desire to be able to buy drugs without consequence), but rather principled debates about the scope of government, personal liberty, and so on.
Same with the idea of universal income. Your evaluation that the idea is “kooky” would have been shared by one economics professor — the token left-wing professor who was nearly a full-blown socialist. Every other economics professor (both conservative, and non-aligned) were adamantly supportive of the idea. And they had very good reasons. Their arguments were quite persuasive and, quite frankly, I believe correct.
But the point here is that conservatism has changed. It has grown increasingly child-like, and seems to have forfeited the rich, intellectual tradition which used to define it. Whereas once, conservatives would be able to argue persuasively on issues like drug legalization and UBI, and were able to do so with well-reasoned, abstract arguments, today conservatism is reduced to casual dismissal and name-calling (not in your post, obviously, but frequently).
This is a shame, and it basically cedes the intellectual battleground to those who do not share the same fundamental beliefs that used to define conservatism.
...and to talk about drug legalization also.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.