UBI can be inflation adjusted. At some point, there has to be real taxation that is paid by the rich, or else capitalism becomes a game that is ultimately WON by a fraction of a percent of the population, while everybody else rots. That's why we have & need taxes, economic regulations, to keep a balance that doesn't result in half of the country starving in the next couple of decades. I'm fine with not allowing an illegal workforce, but you're being silly if you think that will make a noticeable difference with automation and technological advancement. Illegal work didn't take the manufacturing jobs in America, and getting rid of it won't fix the core of that problem, which is THE core problem we have and are going to be facing.
Nah, because communist uprisings were the eventual outcome of a fully fledged capitalist system where a small fraction of the population owned all of the capital...and automation. Just because pre-industrial agrarian societies tried Communism in order to jump start their own industrialization and largely failed doesn't mean it can't work or isn't true.
Inflation adjusted means raising UBI, and then the inflation just goes up more. It doesn't fix anything. Also illegals are a large part of the problem. You are just deflecting with the automation argument which is a cheap distraction. That is a whole different issue and is actually needed to replace our population which we need to get below replacement levels if we are going to cut down our environmental impact. Japan is doing this and it works. Automation isn't a problem. It can be a solution. More people are not however. It is unrealistic to think we can forever grow our population. We can use tech to help us and even tax companies for using it if need be. This could be used to pay for social programs that we have such as education, and even be put toward our defense and deficit. It is unrealistic to think illegals aren't a burden on tax payers and aren't suppressing wages. To suggest otherwise is a deflection or simple dillusion. They are not our citizens, so I really don't want to be putting resources into them or giving them jobs no matter how menial the elites think they are. They should be sent home so the market can adjust the wages of those jobs and make them better paying. Some of the construction jobs they take actually already offer good wages, and those jobs should be given to our citizens. It is unrealistic to think UBI can be continuously expanded without creating a feedback loop of inflation. Period. Please offer me a solution to solve the feedback loop and I may be more open to it.
Taxing the rich to death won't get it done. According to Forbes in 2017 there were 571 billionaires in the US worth a total of 2.7 trillion dollars. If you stole every single cent from them and divided it among 300 million people it comes out to 8 grand a person. That won't even cover most people's health insurance premiums for a year. Go look at tax rates in the UK. The top rate is only 45%. That is only 8 points higher than the US at 37%. However, the tax bracket for income between 46,350 Euros ($50,000) and 150,000 Euros ($169,000) is 40%. Meanwhile, our brackets for 50k-169k are 22% and then up to 24% over $82,500. Employees in the UK also pay 12% more for their national insurance (social security) on their weekly income between 162 euros and 892 euros. Then 2% on income above that. Good luck selling those 40% brackets to middle income families in this country... but that is what it will take to get socialized programs here in the US.
Donald Trump Paid $1.4 Million in a Dispute Over Undocumented Workers. Read the Newly Unsealed Legal Papers http://time.com/5039109/donald-trump-undocumented-polish-trump-tower-bonwit-teller/ Trump golf club employed illegal immigrants: report https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-golf-club-employed-illegal-immigrants-report-2018-12-06
I think this response (along with many others on this thread) is a great example of the challenges Andrew will face, he is going to do a lot of educating on why he is backing this policy and what he believes this policy will achieve. UBI is not a fix all, it is not meant to substitute the jobs/incomes of those who will lose their jobs to automation. It's basically buying time to try and help people weather the drastic economic transition and restructuring that will take place. How we fix our education system, how we find ways to give these displaced workers respectful place in the new economy, and other major issues are still problems that will need to be addressed in part by the government. UBI is just a very good lifeline that will give us the time to address all these big problems. If we don't do UBI, it will be difficult on actually solving any of these issues due to potential widespread civil unrest. And yes, despite the fact that Yang's UBI is funded by a tax on the corporations that cause worker displacement, it will to some degree also help those same corporations. But the bottom line is that the UBI will never be able to replace the compensation of somebody earning 50-75K nor the sense of fulfillment by working such a job, those are another set of hurdles.
This isn't true, when illegals were kicked out of Georgia the state economy went into recession and legal citizens lost their jobs. That's because the illegals did work at a lower wage but then once kicked out it forced produce prices to increase dramatically causing inflation and the local economy to collapse.
Hey you bring up a great point man, but I did some reading and it turns out that is a state level issue and it can be fixed if the laws to deport immigrants and enforce our laws are expanding nationally. Also don't worry, automation will replace some of those jobs. Teams of skilled prisoners can also be brought in, who would likely love a chance to get outside and earn money... also to eat a fresh peach or two in that case of Georgia). I looked it up and Georgia's problem was specifically related to agricultural profit loss, which is a result of picker wages remaining low in order to prevent food from rising in price. A farm in Georgia cannot compete with a farm in a neighboring state without such laws, obviously, therefore it can't raise wages (that's why is failed on the state level). If you eliminate the illegals nationally, and install appropriate tariffs if needed for competing with Mexican produce, the slight rise in food costs can occur and then wages for pickers will be sustainable for people in that industry. Legal citizens will be able to do this job if the salary is worth it. And this isn't a simple task. It involves skill and strength in order to do it right so they deserve a decent wage. This makes our strongest prisoners, and ex cons who may be unable to find work, a good candidate for something like this. The only people who don't like this are people who aren't willing to pay a fair price for vegetables and fruit. And usually its leftists who harp about fair trade coffee and the sort, and how farmers in other countries deserve a fair deal. Well, what about our farmers and pickers? I think they deserve the same. No, I think they deserve better because they're on my team: America. I hate to sound all overly patriotic but I can't help but want the best for our workers. It is ironic that our solution to the illegal problem is to use people who broke the law, but hey it's a good idea to help keep prices low. The market can adjust over time if this is rolled out nationally and people will be OK with the work when the wage is commiserate with the job's demanding nature. This illegals take jobs Americans don't want is false. Americans just want a fair wage for a fair day's work. The current system that Democrats and Republicans are propping up regarding illegal workers in the fields is akin to modern day share-cropping. It is the slavery of our day.
Seems obvious to me that if UBI raises income by x%, then for profit companies will raise consumer goods by x%. In a truly free market, maybe someone won't raise the prices but UBI isn't free market wages so idk. I still think and prefer raising the minimum wage is a better solution since it's a direct impact on all wages and you are not capped at 1k per month. Huge incentives to secure work if higher wages guaranteed no so if you're capped regardless.
Higher wages also create competitive workers and you increase productivity when workers feel like they are making enough to support themselves and even a family. I am not even a huge fan of minimum wage hikes because I think taking illegal labor solves a large part of the problem, but I would be for that before I am for UBI. AKA the new zero.
People always forget that migrant workers and illegal workers spend 100% of their income which is a boon for local economies. Another reason raising the minimum wage is a great idea! Poor people (folks with min wage jobs) don't save so that money goes right back into the machine.
You're selling your fellow conservatives/Republicans short and betraying your own disdain for social programs that no elected official, competent administrator or even minimally sensible voter in either party would abolish or stop paying for.
I don't think a policy of you are losing your 75k job... here is 1k a month will win against Trump. Trump will put the blame on those people losing their jobs directly on Yang, his buddies in Silicon Valley, and democrats like he did in 2016.
You dont need proof it works. Giving everyone 12k a year is utterly pointless. He continues to ignore the question on who will pay for UBI. Corporations are not going to stick around if people really think corporations are going to pay this hand out. Evenly distributing 12k across the board does nothing but raise the COL across the board. UBI is a disastrous idea. It ranks up there with 'free healthcare' and 'free education' w/out at least addressing the costs first.
Agree on some of that, but I don't think I can agree on education and healthcare the same way. It would sky rocket taxes, but it would be a public good and it wouldn't create an inflation feedback loop. Well, maybe not. Both are not easy to roll out but are infinitely better than UBI.
I feel like Yang's implementaion of UBI is like a left-leaning libertarian position. Instead of forcing government benefits to specific things like medicaid, food stamps, etc, you are just given the money equivalent and have the freedom to apply that whatever you want (rent, food, drugs). Anyways, is there a republican position in regards to mitigating potential job loss due to automation? I feel like there hasn't been one outside of vague promises of bringing back manufacturing of which requires smaller and smaller numbers of employees.
Guess again. Odds are that your next guess will be correct. BTW you are not the only person on this thread who appears to not have investigated Andrew Yang's UBI proposal.
