Jump to content


Photo

Universal Basic Income


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#17 Khally

Khally
  • [DkR] Clan Member
  • 485 posts
  • Location:Portugal

Posted 02 June 2014 - 06:21 pm

None of the above is possible without a major cultural/philosophical shift in favour of voluntaryism though; if it was implemented overnight it'd be chaos.

 

Isn't that what ultimately makes that system completely nonviable?


  • 0

medals_zpsc909537a.png      SIGNATURE5_zpsf26a90df.png   


#18 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 02 June 2014 - 06:25 pm

Isn't that what ultimately makes that system completely nonviable?

 

I doubt it's something I'll ever see in my lifetime, but who knows. I still firmly believe it's the only moral system, and would also be the most beneficial to humanity in pretty much every conceivable way.

 

(For those reading this post without reading my previous posts, I am not referring to the thread title, which I'm 100% opposed to).


  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#19 Monkeypooh

Monkeypooh
  • [DkR] Clan Member
  • 649 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 08:13 pm

Saying "the market is not pure" is really saying "human beings are not pure" - so the solution to that is to give a small minority of human beings all the guns and power?

 

well yes it is ...every form of society works the same way ....to say the market is pure and will choose the right option if left to its own devices is true but the sad bit is you have a obstacle to the market working in a pure way ....i am pointing at you the human hence the neoliberalism ideal is flawed from first principle .....

 

Humans are Wonderful and they are total Shite ....see how a drug company works and no greater example can be made on how a market in dead bodies fuels the expansion of human knowledge to fund the saving of human life ...

 

no matter what system u want ....until u change the humans in it then it will be only a rerun of the past ...the best u can hope for is a beneficial

dictatorship (small minority of human beings all the guns and power?)


Edited by Monkeypooh, 02 June 2014 - 08:37 pm.

  • 0

#20 shoogalumps

shoogalumps
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 98 posts
  • Location:Kent
  • Short Name:Sean

Posted 02 June 2014 - 09:39 pm

So what would you have- everybody in charge? Nobody in charge? What regulation would there be? Public services? What about those who cannot work?

 

The government is by no means efficient, but surely has to be the most feasible solution?

 

Why would anyone need to be in charge?  Those who cannot work - there would be friends, family, charities, insurance.  So rather than paying a big wad of your earnings to the government, you would pay less for stuff you pay for already (national insurance and other private insurances - it certainly would not constitute 30-50%% of your pay packet).

 

What's more there is a concept called mutual aid that extends from personal levels all the way up to a community level.  It is the foundation on which things like Building Societies and mutual co-op type organisations were founded - hugely successful outfits in their time and the ones that still exist still are. 

 


None of the above is possible without a major cultural/philosophical shift in favour of voluntaryism though; if it was implemented overnight it'd be chaos.

 

Agree.  That's the problem with statism, it creates dependency on the state.  And that's at the stage now where there's a complete dependency by a huge proportion of the population on the state.  And guess what? The state's solution is largely to create more dependency - at least the champagne socialist type of state's.  And that's how I see this ludicrous idea from someone in Switzerland - which is actually one of the most libertarian states in existence today.

 

Saying "the market is not pure" is really saying "human beings are not pure" - so the solution to that is to give a small minority of human beings all the guns and power?

 

well yes it is ...every form of society works the same way ....to say the market is pure and will choose the right option if left to its own devices is true but the sad bit is you have a obstacle to the market working in a pure way ....i am pointing at you the human hence the neoliberalism ideal is flawed from first principle .....

 

Humans are Wonderful and they are total Shite ....see how a drug company works and no greater example can be made on how a market in dead bodies fuels the expansion of human knowledge to fund the saving of human life ...

 

no matter what system u want ....until u change the humans in it then it will be only a rerun of the past ...the best u can hope for is a beneficial

dictatorship (small minority of human beings all the guns and power?)

 

Neoliberalism?  The free market and the "invisible hand" is a concept from the 18th century - Adam Smith.  Monkey - how are you defining neoliberalism? it is only a couple of decades old in concept, if that.

 

The problem with libertarianism is that politicians have never allowed and will never allow some sort of peaceful transition to it because it takes power away from them and they are almost all power mad megalomaniacs in one form or another.   It would in essence require an educated revolution (an oxymoron).


Edited by shoogalumps, 02 June 2014 - 09:45 pm.

  • 0

#21 Howl

Howl
  • [DkR] Clan Member
  • 11 posts

Posted 04 June 2014 - 12:59 pm

All taxes should be abolished. Taxation is theft, no matter how noble the intentions or what the money is used for. If it's okay for the government to steal people's money to help the poor, then why isn't it okay for me to go around stealing people's money to do the same?

 

 

Police, courts and military bound by a rigid constitution limiting and defining their powers, voluntarily funded. No regulation beyond the preservation of individual rights (keeping people free from force and fraud). Private charity for those who cannot work (it worked pre-welfare state).

 

Probably sounds crazy if you've never looked into libertarianism or Austrian school economics before.

 

None of the above is possible without a major cultural/philosophical shift in favour of voluntaryism though; if it was implemented overnight it'd be chaos.

 

Have I just realised I've joined a guild led by an anarchist? ;)


  • 0

#22 mixe

mixe
  • [DkR] Clan Member
  • 1,123 posts
  • Location:javia
  • Short Name:Mike

Posted 07 June 2014 - 09:30 am

bait and stitch bitches the discussion should be about maximum wage not minimum wage say 30x average wage including investment return so at mo max wage would be 700k 

and sack the min wage as that would sort its self out if the above was done 2 stop the top taking the piss

 

copy pasta from zero hedge is greed good ?

 

Everywhere you look, Americans appear to be extremely obsessed with wealth and money.  These days, networks such as CNN endlessly run "news stories" with titles such as "Best cars for the super rich".  We have television shows where people proudly show off how wealthy they are, and it seems like Hollywood is putting out an endless parade of movies that glorify the lifestyles of the elite.  We have hordes of motivational speakers and "life coaches" that will teach you how to be "more successful" in life, and every small movement in the stock market is carefully monitored by the mainstream news media.  Even in the world of faith, we have an entire class of ministers known as "prosperity preachers", and many of those ministers wear that label quite proudly.  Yes, those that grew up in the 1980s may have been the "greed is good" generation, but the truth is that they didn't have anything on us. As a society we love money, and we are not ashamed to admit it.  In fact, there are times we absolutely revel in it.  For example, Time Magazine published an article this year entitled "Science Proves It: Greed Is Good" and hardly anyone even raised an eyebrow.  But where will America's sick obsession with wealth and money end?  Could it end up destroying us?

I got the idea for this article when I was browsing through CNN's website.  The following are eight "news stories" about wealth that were featured on CNN just on Thursday alone...

#1 "The richest Americans in history"

#2 "How much do you need to be happy?"

#3 "Where are the super rich?"

#4 "From broke to billionaire"

#5 "Homes: What $25 million buys around the world"

#6 "Best cars for the super rich"

#7 "America's homes are bigger than ever"

#8 "Mega yacht with a movie theater"

This is what passes for news these days?

It has been said that we tend to talk about the things that we are obsessed with.

And CNN is clearly obsessed with wealth.

Not that there is anything wrong with having money.

If none of us had any money, we would all be homeless and starving.  So the truth is that money can be very useful.  But when it becomes an idol, that is when it becomes a problem.

And because we have taught entire generations of Americans that becoming wealthy is one of the primary goals in life, it is creating a tremendous amount of envy, jealousy, frustration and anger among those that have not been able to become wealthy.

In recent years, the level of bitterness and resentment that the rest of the nation has toward the very wealthy has risen to an unprecedented level.  It has become exceedingly apparent that the system is designed to funnel wealth to the very top of the food chain, and many of those at the bottom of the food chain are starting to become extremely upset about this.

Since the last financial crisis, almost all of the income gains have gone to the top one percent of all income earners.  The following comes from a recent Huffington Post article...

And income inequality has become such a hot topic that it has even produced a New York Times bestseller by a French economist named Thomas Piketty.  This is what CBS News recently had to say about his book...

 
 

Economic statistics show that incomes for the top 1 percent of U.S. households soared 31 percent from 2009 through 2012, after adjusting for inflation, yet inched up an average of 0.4 percent for those making less. Many economists are sounding alarms that the income gap, greater now than at any time since the Depression, is hurting the economy by limiting growth in consumer spending.

It would be foolish to deny that the gap between the rich and the poor is growing.  Even as the stock market reaches unprecedented heights, the middle class is dying and one out of every five children in Americais living in poverty.

 
 

His book has landed on that debate like a bomb. Piketty's thesis: that the rate of return on capital, such as real estate, dividends and other financial assets, is racing away from the rate of growth required to maintain a healthy economy. If that trend continues for an extended period of time -- if wealth becomes ever more concentrated in the hands of a few -- then inequality is likely to get worse, says Piketty, 43, who started his academic career as an assistant professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and who now teaches at the Paris School of Economics.

 

Another reason "Capital" has caught the public's attention is that inequality is evident in what are by now a host of familiar symptoms. Stagnant pay, except among the super-rich. Soaring health care and education costs. The diminished expectations commonly found in young, especially those lacking college degrees, and old alike, as retirement becomes something to endure rather than to enjoy.

On a global scale, the wealthiest one percent now have 65 times more wealth than the entire poorest half of the global population does.

That is an astounding figure.

Most people don't realize this, but the ultra-wealthy have approximately 32 trillion dollars (that we know about) stashed in offshore banks around the planet.  That amount of money would almost be about enough to pay off the entire U.S. national debt and buy every good and service produced in the United States for an entire year.

Meanwhile, the poorest half of the world's population only owns about 1 percent of all global wealth, and about a billion people throughout the world go to bed hungry every night.

If greed was going to save the world, it would have done it by now.  At this point, the wealthy have accumulated more wealth than they ever have before.  For example, according to Zero Hedge the total amount of wealth in the U.S. has just hit a brand new record high...

But of course most people who are rich are only rich on paper.

 
 

Earlier today the Fed released its latest Flow of Funds report, which showed that in the first quarter household net worth rose from last quarter's $80.3 trillion to a new record high of $81.8 trillion, driven by a $1.5 trillion increase in total assets while household liabilities were virtually unchanged in the quarter. And since the Fed is onboarding all the liabilities why should households bother with debt: that's what the central bank balance sheet is for.

 

As for the proceeds, they go to the mega rich: of the $81.8 trillion in net worth, 70.4% of the total amount or $67.2 trillion, was in financial assets: the higest it has ever been courtesy of just one person: Ben Bernanke, and to a far lesser extent Janet Yellen who however is tasked with picking up Bernanke's pieces.

As noted above, 67.2 trillion dollars of the total of 81.8 trillion dollars of wealth in this nation is made up of financial assets.

So what happens if there is a major financial crisis (such as the derivatives bubble bursting) which causes the total amount of financial wealth in the United States to drop by 50% or more?

What would such an event do to our country?

We are so obsessed with wealth and money that it is truly frightening to think about how we would react as a society if it was taken away.

But this current financial bubble will not last forever.

At some point it will come to an end.

When it does, will our society throw a massive temper tantrum?

Average:

Edited by mixe, 07 June 2014 - 09:33 am.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users