Slashdot Mirror
Entrepreneur Andrew Yang, a Big Supporter Of Universal Basic Income, is Running For President (techcrunch.com)
In a recently published podcast, Andrew Yang, tech entrepreneur and founder of Venture for America, said he is vying for the Democratic party nomination to run for President of the United States. From a report: Yang outlines his radical policy agenda, which focuses on Universal Basic Income and includes a "freedom dividend." He talks about the very real and immediate threat of artificial intelligence, how new technologies are erasing millions of jobs before our eyes, and why we need to put humanity first. He also addresses "the big four" and what he plans to do about Amazon.
During the interview, Yang called out governments inability to address large scale problems and the challenges that technology is creating in modern American society. "I believe that we need to start owning these realities [of automation and artificial intelligence taking away jobs] and these challenges as a people, as a country, and as a society, and start being honest. I'm running for president to solve the big problems and to show that these things are not beyond us," Yang says. Yang's own plan to address the increasing power tech companies are wielding in the world involves something called a "freedom dividend", which would paid for by a value-added tax. The revenue from that tax (levied on "gains from the big four") would be redistributed via the "freedom dividend" to citizens, Yang says.
During the interview, Yang called out governments inability to address large scale problems and the challenges that technology is creating in modern American society. "I believe that we need to start owning these realities [of automation and artificial intelligence taking away jobs] and these challenges as a people, as a country, and as a society, and start being honest. I'm running for president to solve the big problems and to show that these things are not beyond us," Yang says. Yang's own plan to address the increasing power tech companies are wielding in the world involves something called a "freedom dividend", which would paid for by a value-added tax. The revenue from that tax (levied on "gains from the big four") would be redistributed via the "freedom dividend" to citizens, Yang says.
We either plan for it now or start buying pitchforks and torches. And oiling up the guillotines because we _will_ eat the rich.
Only I can judge you.
I don't deny that one day UBI might be feasible, and even necessary but it's just too soon and too radical, especially for the US. He's not going to get his party's nomination, and if he does, it's 4 more years of Trump.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
governments inability to address large scale problems
And what makes him think 'government' would perform any differently with him behind the wheel?? GTFOH (i.e. never mind; I don't want to know).
Pat Paulsen has a better chance than Yang.
right here, so all else being equal he gets my (primary) vote in favor of anyone else who doesn't.
I'd rather see him stumping on Medicare for All than basic income though.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The entertainment of the 2020 Democrat primaries is going to be a lot more interesting than even the Republican 2016 primaries were.
Who will win? Old traditional Democrats or one of the new variety of young Leftists?
It's going to be a joke like the 2016 primaries were- and probably end up with some ridiculous extremist winning the nomination. UBI guy, Bernie Sanders, Kanye West, Oprah Winfrey? Can we not have a decent level headed somewhat moderate person please? Why are all the names being put forwards either extremists or just plain bonkers.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
... thinking there will still be a United States in 2020.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
At this point in USA history it is really time to make a stand towards eliminating our party system. The easiest way to do that is get a few big players campaigning on independent tickets, or small third parties with the goal of gaining the 5-10 percent for national recognition and then start winning overall elections once the big parties have begun faltering.
Until that happens we will see the same mess repeating that has been for the past 200+ years of American History.
Promising free shit to the young, stupid, and lazy worked out so great for Bernie, didn't it?
These people should first worry about the DNC existing long enough to put forth a candidate in 2020. It's a bit premature to be hobbling together a hollow platform that will only get you Bernied.
Beyond that, why are you planning for action in 2020 when you'll be up against an incumbent POTUS? (For all of you who can't fathom Trump being reelected - Bush Jr. was reviled and won reelection, and the popular vote, easily. This happened because he was the incumbent and people fear change. The DNC put forth a bland turkey-burger candidate knowing they didn't want to waste any real effort against an incumbent. And of course, Obama sat and watched as the economy burned and our rights were stripped away and the surveillance state grew. He, too, won reelection handily.)
You save your plays until 2024 unless you want to tip your hand and risk being scooped. It might make sense to throw your hat into the ring in 2020 and get your name out there, but you do NOT put your platform out there. It'll just have 4 extra years to be dismantled, attacked, made irrelevant, or copied.
I view UBI as just another fad in the recent trend of America's liberal thinking (which, by the way, has been taken over by almost teenage-/child-like levels of logic) that seeks to equalize all outcomes for all people, end suffering, poverty, and eliminate inequity at every stage of life. Damn anyone who thinks otherwise or wonders about how it will work (and be accused of spouting hate speech if you disagree). This is getting ridiculous, and is by the way, impossible. And mind you, I'm generally liberal myself.
UBI is the most blatant example among many proposals that is very clearly a taking of $ from the highest earners, and giving it to the lowest earners. How else could it work? If you have a closed system where the income distribution is even linear up the scale, the only way UBI works is if the top subsidize the bottom. So it's a different form of progressive tax.
However, in this case, instead of subsidizing the means to be productive and earn a living, you simply give the people cash and assume they'll work it out for themselves. (For those imagining we would keep the social services, get real -- would we really give them cash *and* the social services too? Isn't UBI envisioned as a way to reduce social services? If social services worked, why do UBI?)
Anyway, aside from the possibility somehow that corporations are the ones taxed and not individuals -- the long term question is: what kind of society does this produce, if brought to its conclusion? Some kind of Star Trek utopia where everyone's free to pursue higher, loftier goals for humanity? Or, more realistically, some kind of even more unbalanced state where the very few people at the top produce wealth, the middle class is hollowed out, and the lowest earners don't have to work? Has anyone studied the incentives that this produces, and whether it makes our society better?
I think that is lacking in these idealized proposals.
Can we not have a decent level headed somewhat moderate person please?
If America wanted a centrist, it would have elected Clinton. That's not what America wants. Why can't you see that? It's as plain as day. America would rather have a pussy-grabbing steak salesman than a centrist.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Hillary is going to run again and whoa be unto anyone who dares stand in her way.
If America wanted an establishment whore, it would have elected Clinton. Instead it elected Trump and got one anyway.
You really bumped your head hard if you call Hillary a centerist... Think about that for a few minutes until the birds stop flying around your head..
Ever hear of Barack Obama?
Whoever wins the Democratic nomination will have to do whatever the corporate interests that run the US tell them to do.
If they don't they have no chance. Let's not pretend the voters have any say in the matter.
I'm a born-and-raised American citizen, was not Republican OR Democrat in November 2016, and I didn't want EITHER ONE OF THEM; what does that make me, you drunk sonofabitch?
I note that Mr. Trump is even older at 71. If he does another term he would be 78 by the end*. After having Mr. Reagan spend most his second term incapable because of age related illness, I would think the people of the US would not be keen on having another Alzheimer's sufferer in the highest office in the land.
Who knows though, you guys did reelect that odd Mr. Bush II.
* Feel free to check my maths, could be wrong.
Just in case someone wonders, why you need a high-capacity magazine for your pistol and rifle, show them the above quote.
The scum are asking for it, and you'll need to double-tap each one of them, just to make sure...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
Until the gov't ends up owning all of the property after confiscating it from those who are eventually unable to pay the ever-increasing land-value tax. What you describe will quickly create a feedback loop that destroys us all.
So, when a Libertarian announces his candidacy, they'll also be featured on the /. front page?
No, no bias here at all...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You really bumped your head hard if you call Hillary a centerist... Think about that for a few minutes until the birds stop flying around your head..
The Democratic party is a centrist party, it does not represent the will of the actual left in this country. It proved that when it refused to let Sanders win the nomination for Democratic candidate for president. Clinton's position is precisely aligned with the Democratic party. She literally could not be any more centrist. She has always supported defense contractors, she has entirely given up on single payer health care since taking campaign contributions from Big Pharma, and she can and will do nothing to advance the liberal cause in America. The best you could have hoped for from Clinton was maintenance of the status quo, and the status quo is that more and more households in America are failing so that is clearly not a desirable outcome.
Clinton was the status quo candidate. Sanders was the candidate who promised to shake things up towards the left; Trump promised to shake things up towards the right. The DNC torpedoed Sanders and the shake things up vote got us Trump. And if the DNC continues to fail to support leftist candidates, we're going to get more of the same. If not Trump, then Pence. Do you really want to see what happens when a religious wingnut like Pence takes office?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Why are all the names being put in clickbait social media posts either extremists or just plain bonkers.
FTFY. You won't hear about the more boring candidates on social media.
Someone had to do it.
How much does the US army, navy and airforce waste every year? You think that is sustainable? Are you really that stupid?
#DeleteFacebook
She is absolutely running again. Her campaign structure is still in place, she's still doing the book tours and meet/greets, etc.
I'm a born-and-raised American citizen, was not Republican OR Democrat in November 2016, and I didn't want EITHER ONE OF THEM; what does that make me, you drunk sonofabitch?
Either someone who wanted to vote for Sanders, or a statistical outlier whose influence on the election was negligible and can be ignored.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Screw you.
Look, lets call a spade a spade here... he is asking for socialism.
No. Socialism is defined as worker ownership of the means of production (that is, the factories). We usually think of state socialism: state ownership of the means of production (where the state claims to be operating on behalf of the workers.)
Unless he is advocating worker (or state) ownership fo the means of production, it's not socialism.
His platform is "democracy is dead." People need to get comfortable saying that, because that's what it is... if you are for UBI, you are a socialist. ;)
Democracy is a political system and socialism is an economic system. But, no. If you are for the state ownership of the means of production you are a socialist. If you are for UBI, you are for something that is not socialism (unless it also includes state ownership of the means of production.)
I have gotten tired of people calling pretty much everything under the sun that isn't laissez faire capitalism "socialism." The word has a defined meaning. Use it.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Because we elect representatives and the representatives are bought and paid for by corporations and the rich, things will never be fair. We will never see a UBI because that will never be allowed to come to a vote.
Instead of being a representative democracy, we should change over to a direct democracy. Let the people individually vote on dreamers, gun control, environmental issues, drug laws, ... You'll quickly find that things would change, some for the worst, but more for the best. The rich would have to spend their money convincing us to go their way instead of our cheap house and senate representatives.
Wouldn't it be ironic that all those people Slashdotters usually look down on...people who work with their hands, the earth, and livestock, are suddenly the only ones that can feed and raise a family?
Meanwhile, erstwhile Slashdot posters are sit in front of their dark screens wishing they could post some snark about how they've been screwed by automation, the Rich, or both.
Absolutely!!!
Much better alternative to a leftist that wants larger government that is even more intrusive into our private lives, and would like to curtail some amendments more than others.
In a freakin' heartbeat brother.
I'd vote for a small soapdish with no personality, than a leftist like Sanders, or worse.
If you could go back to JFK type democrat...perhaps that might be more palatable, but at this point the Dems seem to be WAAAAAY further to the left than one of their better leaders.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
...Can we not have a decent level headed somewhat moderate person please? Why are all the names being put forwards either extremists or just plain bonkers.
It worked for the GOP.
Indiana was not going to re-elect Pence as governor. Indi-frekin-ana. If they don't want him, no one does.
The scumbag's explicit reference to guillotine shows, the French terror is what he wants for this country. He may be too stupid to do very much to advance this goal, but he is still a scumbag — just the kind to stand out there masked and shouting "Communism will win".
Adherents of the vilest and deadliest school of thought known to humanity, responsible for millions of deaths and economic devastation of entire countries, these people somehow remain acceptable for the polite society — and even find sympathetic moderators to upvote their murderous rhetoric. All the while, for example, the stupid schmucks of the (relatively) harmless KKK are hunted and persecuted as if they were Satan incarnates.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You can have mass immigration or you can have nice things. Notice that the people who are pushing mass immigration, such as Koch bros, already have nice things and benefit more from cheaper labor than better public schools and such. UBI is another example of this. If the US had less immigration, both legal and illegal, as well as no anchor babies then UBI would be much more attainable. Also wages would be better, traffic would be less, and housing would be more affordable. UBI is interesting but unless immigration is *greatly* reduced don't expect it regardless of how much AI and robotics reduce jobs.
You have nothing worth clawing back moron. The difference between you and a homeless person is less than a minor round-off error for the wealthy. That is also the value they attach to your life.
You are the scum and your high-capacity magazine may help you take your family out of their misery if you don't decide to go hunting the wealthy along with the rest of us.
Only I can judge you.
Thank you for lifting the suspicion off me having a conflict of interest in the matter.
99% of Communists give the rest a bad name... Not only do they seek to kill the rich, the sympathizers are also subject to death — along with their families.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Hillary is probably the most centrist presidential candidate from the main parties that the USA ever had.
She would have been a foreign policy hawk, like most of the Republican party wants, and her economic policy would certainly have been more right-wing than Obama (and he is not exactly screaming for the socialist stuff like protection of steel workers). Her staff appointments would reflect orthodox business leader thinking.
The only thing slightly left wing about her is her support for Obamacare. She would likely have tried to steer that in a more insurance-company-friendly direction though.
Really, the only thing standing between her and a Republican nomination is a deal with the NRA and the fact that she has ovaries.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
You are a Trump enabler. Deep in your heart you want Trump to be the POTUS but you dont want your fingerprints on it.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You forgot to add all-caps. How are people going to know you are right if you don't put them?
Only I can judge you.
It's "woe", moran!
Only I can judge you.
I agree! I'm with Sanders!
Only I can judge you.
Standard hospital systems regularly kill people. Our modern medical system is a minefield. Is the VA demonstrably worse than average?
Only I can judge you.
Go eat your soy, wingnut.
That's not why he was elected. He was elected despite of that.
Your stupid "centrist" DNC managed to dramatically piss off one of the solid bases - white working class males in three key wiggle states. They decided to cater instead to various economically insignificant, but politically growing minorities in already Democrat states.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
There are 323 million people in the US, and about 60% of them are between 18 and 65. That is around 194 million people. Yang's idea is to give each of them $1,000 per month. That is a $194 billion monthly expense. For 12 months, that would be $2.3 trillion. The current US Federal budget is $4.15 trillion and has a budget deficit of $503 billion. This would not only increase the Federal budget by more than 50%, it would more than quintuple the budget deficit. And this is a good idea - how?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
She only knows how to do one thing, but somebody needs to explain the situation to her. She put Trump in office...that's how bad at politics she is.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
According to this report, about $125 billion over 5 years - so about $25 billion a year. That would fund Yang's approach for about 4 days. How do we fund the other 361 days?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The best you could have hoped for from Clinton was maintenance of the status quo, and the status quo is that more and more households in America are failing so that is clearly not a desirable outcome.
And that, in a nutshell, is the biggest reason she lost: she offered nothing new, just four more years of President Obama's failed policies, and enough voters in enough states wanted change, so that's what she got. (The other reason, of course, is that she spent most of the campaign in states that she couldn't lose if she tried instead of fighting for those that she could have won if she'd bothered to campaign there.)
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Seems to me that most people calling for UBI are arguing that AI will eliminate jobs, and thus, we need UBI to sustain those who lose them, are also open-borders types that would flood millions more into the country in the face of those shrinking job prospects. Hard to reconcile those positions unless you are just not thinking critically. (Not that I am suggesting that if we lock down the borders, we could then institute UBI--socialism has gone so well for Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea and the straight-up Robin Hood wealth transfer that is UBI is a remarketing of socialism).
they have machine guns now. And supply lines so that when your semi-autos run out of bullets theirs don't. Best case scenario you get a military junta and a change of masters.
Violence isn't going to work anymore. If you want freedom you have to take care of your working class _before_ they turn to a militant strong man. So far we are not doing a good job of that. Hopefully next election we turn things around and at least run somebody like this Andrew fellow who appears to belong to the populist left.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It's about having the power of life or death by controlling access to food, shelter and medical care. It's about power, not things.
.1%) when you're part of the working class.
Yes, I know that's counter-intuitive. Lots of things are. It's difficult to think like a truly Rich person (e.g. a 1% or a
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
if anything you need to encourage them. Once people hit a certain amount of wealth they're content to have 1-2 children. Of course, that only happens if you hit that wealth limit (and if you don't have the Elephant in the room, religion, forcing people to spit out kids. Can't tell you how many Catholics I know with their 3rd, 4th, 5th child in their 40s...)
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
he promised to keep jobs here, provide medical care for all and huge tax cuts that would somehow be paid for by magic fairy dust. Meanwhile Hilary didn't promise jack (her campaign ads were almost completely devoid of policy) and you can see how that worked out.
People _want_ the government to step in and help them. What they do _not_ want is for the gov't to step in and help anyone else. It doesn't work like that. Either nobody gets left behind or everybody does.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
our Senate and Electoral colleges were purpose built to protect the interests of a few wealthy landowners. The political parties are just natural outgrowths of that system. What's needed is a parliamentary system that gives everybody who gets x% of the vote some power. That and compulsory voting. If voting was mandatory people couldn't get away with voter suppression.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
How much does the US army, navy and airforce waste every year? You think that is sustainable? Are you really that stupid?
US DoD annual budget: just under 600$ Billion
US DHHS annual budget: just over 1,200$ Billion
Assuming government agencies are equally inefficient and wasteful, which one should you be kvetching about?
Unless that amounts to suicide. Then you have to be willing to kill yourself and admit you have failed at existing. That takes more stones than any US president will ever have. What will actually happen is that the US will default at some time. The rest of the world will recover from that after a decade or two, but the US will not.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
So-called Universal Basic Income WILL NOT WORK for 300,000,000 people, plain and simple, why can't you all see that!?
Because you are a clueless moron that cannot do numbers?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Have you nor heard? Facebook is in decline...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
At one time every able bodied man was supposed to turn out for the defense of the village whenever the feudal lord ordered it. We then evolved into professional volunteer armies and today the concept of the draft has gone away.
Similarly in the future people will work if they want to not because they have been drafted to. Today everyone has to work or starve - there is no real choice.
With an UBI, work becomes a choice and the workers will be much more professional as they would have CHOSEN to work rather than forced to.
**Life is too short to be serious**
and look what it got us.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The grain dole in Roman times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Just saying it wouldn't be the first time government supplied free sustenance. With mixed results. And then Regan gave us the cheese: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You do realize you are full of shit, right? Because Trump is in the process of mucking up things so badly at the Federal level that anybody who follows him will have greatly lessened power. As it should be, actually.
Your 'jesus-hate' shit is sorta loud, You might want to tone it down, because people don't want to listen to that shit.
'moran' is a dog whistle.
Go back to your fucking Democratic Underground and quit ruining Slashdot.
OK, talking to a true-blue Californian Democrat:
The Californian says, "We have it figured out. We get UBI, we do not have to work anymore!"
And I ask, "But who is going to do all the needed work?"
"Ah, simple," says he. "The illegal immigrants!"
"But they don't pay taxes!"
Then, with a quick wink he says "We are still working on that minor problem!"
You are probably making the fallacy of comparing to somebody outside the country and comparing to absolute amount of money. Which is non sense, and mostly used as an excuse by some to not do anything "hey you are richer than some guy in (insert 3rd world country) so don't complain". What you have to compare to is with purchasing power parity. A low income American may earn more money in absolute than a middle class Bengladeshi but this means jack shit if the PPP is so that the bengladeshi can afford far more stuff - local price being much lower for him. The "they earn only 10$ a day" is meaningless if you do not know how it cost to have a minimum "basket" (a roof, heating in winter where required, minimum food and education). Sure I may earn 4 time what that 10$ a day guy earn,but if my PPP is 8 times higher than his, then I am effectively poorer. So no that "there is always someone poorer than you" is mostly bullshit hot air.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Yeah, cool, take all the wealth from the 'wealthy' - sounds great, who'll pay the UBI bill in year two after you confiscate everyone's wealth the first year?
$1,000/month, times 320 million recipients each month, you'll burn through all 'wealthy people's' money in no time.
320 million times $1,000/month is $320 Billion/month, or just about $4 Trillion a year. It takes a thousand billionaires to make one trillion, how many billionaires are there in America? Do we really have 4K billionaires in America?
No.
Ken
Most of those entitlements are Social Security and Medicare (about $1 trillion); since Yang's plan is for those under 65, those entitlements would still exist.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
So let me get this straight: we take Government money, give it to people, then take a big chunk of it back in the form or taxes? Let me give you $100, then have you give me back $40. I'm still out $60, and a lot of extra bookkeeping in the form of, well, Form 1040.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Let me guess, you also graduated top of your class at Navy SEALS?
Eat the rich.
You'll run out of bullets real fast and odds are you're absolutely useless in a heated situation, just like all of your big-wallet peers, so while you may hit one person, the next 20 will tear you apart, literally.
Don't underestimate the brutal efficiency of a raging mob.
Eat the rich.
Industry will pay. You know those taxes they keep dodging right now.
Pay your taxes or GTFO.
Eat the rich.
A-MEN Brother!
Well, you're another idiot. Trump is provably worse than Clinton and you helped make America grate.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The UBI:
1: Destroys the entire welfare system - replacing it with the UBI.
2: Does not replace the requirement to work, because it will be set at a low level.
3: Is a business subsidy in disguise, as businesses will slash washes to soak up the UBI, over time (look at the trend of not sharing profit from increased productivity).
4: Will be destroyed as soon as a big enough financial crisis hits - because it will become 'unaffordable' at that point.
So guys, when the party ends you're lining up for slashing of wages, complete destruction of your welfare system, and a massive subsidy to businesses in the meantime - with no fucking plan of what to do when the policy comes crashing down...
It's the worst own-goal imaginable. Yet people don't fucking see this.
Before you could even come close do enacting some type of VAT like that, you'd have to:
1. Entirely remove, and BAN from existence by law, the current income tax we have now.
No. "VAT" is a fancy term for sales tax. (The "value added" just means that you don't double-tax something that goes through a middle broker. If I buy steel and turn it into, say, kitchen knives, the tax is only on the value added, since the steel itself was already taxed.)
Sales tax and income tax are not mutually exclusive. You can have both.
2. You'd have to also get rid of all state and local taxes...
Sales tax and state tax are not mutually exclusive. You can have both.
and the Feds can't dictate that type of policy directly to the states, so, guessing that wouldn't fly.
To get something like that through, you'd have to make it the ONLY tax there is...
Again: no. There are many many many examples of places you have multiple taxes. It happens all the time. One tax does not mean you can't have another
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Oh, I understand it. What is your claimed multiplier effect for that $100? Why not just give everyone $10,000 per month and really get the economy roaring?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Can we not have a decent level headed somewhat moderate person please?
No, you can't. They don't win nominations or elections in today's political climate. At best you might be able to win with a charismatic, but level headed moderate. Dull people just don't win presidential elections, though Hillary and Gore both came really, really close.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
I'm not a communist, I'm a Socialist Democrat, get it right twink!
Only I can judge you.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I eat grass-fed beef, drink raw milk, and pastured chicken.
I wouldn't eat soy even if you and your boyfriend prepared it fantastically for me.
Only I can judge you.
your mom is a dog whistle
Only I can judge you.
stop sniffing around in the bushes, fido.
1% cannot own 80% wealth unless they're running Pyramid schemes;
Casteism
Your mom likes when I sniff around her bush.
Only I can judge you.
Because a rich dude with simple solutions is working so well for us now!
is to try to make people dependent on the government forever. Automation is an inherently freeing technology. Intervention, which doesn't have to be from the government btw should be geared toward getting people to use technology to become self sufficient as possible. There can be a safety net as there always has been of course. But not this creeping daycare the elite seem to want.