Slashdot Mirror
California City Tries Universal Basic Income Programs -- Including One Targeting Potential Shooters (latimes.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the Los Angeles Times:
Mayor Michael Tubbs, a Stockton native and Stanford graduate who is all of 27 years old, wants to give at least $500 a month to a select group of residents. They'll be able to spend it as they wish, for 18 months, in a pilot program to test the impact of what's called guaranteed basic income... Workers in Silicon Valley and the San Francisco-Oakland area, driven out of the cuckoo housing markets in those communities, have snapped up cheaper properties in Stockton, accepting the bargain of killer commutes... But Stockton still suffers the crushing burdens of poverty, crime and now the rising rents and home prices that come with gentrification. For those who don't have the education or training to work 60 miles away on tech's front lines, Stockton still struggles to develop jobs that pay a living wage...
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Space X's Elon Musk have both pitched the idea in terms of inevitability, given the growing income gap and the threat of massive job losses because of automation... As small as the program will be, it's not going to dramatically affect many Stockton residents, but the goal is to get a sense of whether such an infusion on a broader scale can significantly alter lives and boost the economy.
The program will be funded by private and nonprofit sources, according to the article. And while it may not start until early next year, Stockton is already launching a similar program where the benefits are more targeted. Stockton is about to award stipends of up to $1,000 a month to residents deemed most likely to shoot somebody... The idea is that a small number of people are responsible for a large percentage of violence, and offering them an alternative path -- with counseling and case management over an 18-month period, along with a stipend if they stay the course -- can be a good investment all around.
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Space X's Elon Musk have both pitched the idea in terms of inevitability, given the growing income gap and the threat of massive job losses because of automation... As small as the program will be, it's not going to dramatically affect many Stockton residents, but the goal is to get a sense of whether such an infusion on a broader scale can significantly alter lives and boost the economy.
The program will be funded by private and nonprofit sources, according to the article. And while it may not start until early next year, Stockton is already launching a similar program where the benefits are more targeted. Stockton is about to award stipends of up to $1,000 a month to residents deemed most likely to shoot somebody... The idea is that a small number of people are responsible for a large percentage of violence, and offering them an alternative path -- with counseling and case management over an 18-month period, along with a stipend if they stay the course -- can be a good investment all around.
$500 UBI a month for a select group of individuals, and $1000 a month for an even more select group of individuals.
Hmmm
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
You don't get any money? Only if you are going to shoot someone? Can you just say you're going to shoot someone? That's considered a threat in most places.
How is a "select group" "universal"?
Is that because it is too expensive to be "universal"? If there are income criteria attached, there is already a name for such a program.... it is called "welfare".
My country has a basic welfare allowance which I admire. A good proportion of recipients spend their money on drugs then demand food subsidies. While I don't want bureaucratic money-management, there needs to be some disincentives for avoiding self-sufficiency.
more "UBI" circlejerk.
this is not UBI, this is not similar to UBI.
ignoring that, paying criminals not to be criminals hasn't worked yet. poverty isn't the driver. being broken human beings is.
You can get more money by making them think you're likely to shoot someone?
Is that really a smart idea?
This is so fucking stupid. We've had the War on Poverty for 75 years and there's more people on government aid then ever before. If you create a special fund that only gives money to violent criminals, guess what you're going to get a lot more of?
So those terrorist virgins who hate women and the men who date them would now be getting universal basic income? The $1000 a month would not fix their problem, which is that they desperately want sex with the same women they hate. And no, ordering up hookers is a proposal they have already rejected. They need a mental fix.
Who the stipend would actually help are scammers who falsely claim to be terrorist virgins.
"But Stockton still suffers the crushing burdens of poverty, crime and now the rising rents and home prices that come with gentrification."
If Stockton is 'gentrifying' then clearly we have crossed over into new territory . You hear the same about Portland of course, but now Reno, and weird bits of Texas, Idaho, and so on. Housing is just plain getting more expensive nationwide. Time to stop blaming 'cuckoo' places like SV, NYC, etc. Things get more expensive and some things get more expensive faster than others. Sucks that it's housing, but enough
Stockton is about to award stipends of up to $1,000 a month to residents deemed most likely to shoot somebody...
The extreme right wing thinks everything is a market, even things that aren't. The extreme left wing thinks you can fix everyone. Let's combine the two into fixing people through just giving them money!
This is stupid. If you really can identify people "most likely to shoot people", you're not going to fix their life just by giving them money. These people have some kind of mental problem, not a money problem. Worst case scenario is you'll just fund people to buy guns they couldn't afford before.
Instead of PreCrime sending you to jail, it sends you a check? I'm cool with that.
One day we'll accept that it's cheaper and better to send some people a kilo of weed and a $500 PSN giftcard than to deal with the consequences of what they're doing when they're NOT high and staying home being entertained.
It's unlikely many people will attempt to game the neural net by intentionally acting like a destitute person, if they're able to avoid it; and the neural net can distinguish those cases from those who really need it, anyhow.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Go back to Russia, troll.
That depend on Stockton's badass image
That's the whole idea behind Planed Parenthood.
Please stop using the term universal to describe a program that targets a relative handful of people.
It makes no sense to take from someone who earns the money and give it to someone who has done nothing to earn the money. /p>
.. And yet, in Europe we have the EU.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
Not necessarily, they just cancelled early because of politics.
Table-ized A.I.
Stupidest thing? How about generalizing it to pay criminals to not commit crimes? Because no one could possibly want to game the system....
http://time.com/4292260/richmond-program-lower-crime/
Or did i just read that they are gonna give a $1000 per month allowance to potential shooters for ammo and body armor? Novel.
who the fuck is the dumb enough to commute 120 miles a day!?
It makes no sense to take from someone who earns the money and give it to someone who has done nothing to earn the money.
Now show us some evidence that the people who are getting the most money in our society are actually earning any of it.
And what do you do when there is no jobs left for the people that lack qualifications? You either pay them and hope they keep quiet or you donâ(TM)t and will have to deal with an uprising (or revolution). If a critical mass of people become jobless this will be the only two options. But I guess we wonâ(TM)t go there - even the super rich know that they wonâ(TM)t be able to generate more wealth if the masses have no revenues. There will be no one willing to pay for the next crappy product or service (or even rent).
Given they are trying to send a bunch of money to people they think are going to shoot up someplace, I have the perfect name for the program...
"Ammo for Assholes"
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So, hereâ(TM)s the thing.
âDeserveâ(TM) and âEarnâ(TM) are emotionally charged. The right whips idiots into a frenzy, because that is a well proven path to about 30-35% of the electorate in (seems like) most places. Itâ(TM)s not a large effort to turn that into an electoral mandate, and then Never Let Go.
UBI is inevitable, yes. So is US (for those of you there) electorate being non majority cracker. In the mean time, informed logic doesnâ(TM)t work, it will only be used by the right like this... Undeserving Asshole (those people) threatens to take my money -> elect Angry Grandpa.
So make the argument. Youâ(TM)re preaching to the converted. Makes us feel good, but feeds the right wing trolls
It is, however, what capitalism wants to try as a UBI so it fails, it doesn't cost "too much" and it will still make workers AVE to work for a living, making them wage slaves. It is just enough though to stop riots in the streets of those with least to lose in a revolution that will see those capitalists in power dead or poor (which is a fate worse than death to them).
From Wikipedia:
1) A 2010 Gallup poll ranked Stockton the most obese metro area in the US with an obesity rate of 34.6%
2) A 2012 issue of Forbes ranked Stockton the eighth most miserable US city, a result of the steep drop in home values and high unemployment.
3) In 2012 the National Insurance Crime Bureau ranked Stockton seventh in auto theft rate per capita .
4) In 2012 Stockton was ranked as the tenth most dangerous city in America and the second most dangerous in California.
5) In 2013 Stockton was ranked as the third least literate city in the U.S. with less than 17% of adults holding a college degree.
6) The 2010 census finds stockton 80% non-white.
If you want to give free money to people, that's your business. But give your money, not mine. Do not steal my money through taxation to give it for free to someone else. Do not clean your conscience with my money. If you don't have enough money, create a crowdfunding campaign or convince an investor.
Because only complete idiots and government mouthpieces "think" that a vague accusation saying nothing works as an argument.
Socialism is about reducing the maximum number of people to dependence on the state.
So it kind of is - they are just quite specific about what 'equality' is, equality is total dependence on state control and funding - basically the reduction of everyone to the lowest point, so that no one will challenge those in control 'who are doing things for the good of everyone else'
Every socialist state so far has effectively proven this, without exception.
Socialism is a (one of many) Totalitarianist solution.
How many bullets does that buy? What's prevent criminal not to start act more dangerous so they can get $1,000?
Isn't Richmond California already paying violent criminal to reduce crime? https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/19/health/cash-for-criminals-richmond-california/index.html
I don't know how successful it is but I would think if it was it would be more widely reported or adopted by other cities. How can $1,000 compete with drug money.
I like to know how $500 a month to a select group of residents. work? If it's not given to everybody then it's not universal program. The major problem with these type idea is it sound good on paper but when it comes to funding and execution that's going to be a total nightmare.
Upcoming headline: "Suspect in Stockton mass shooting was upset he only qualified for $500 UBI."
Calm down kiddo.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
Then they can just shoot the economic terrorists who alienated them from their God-given rights.
If I'm a peaceful guy not getting $1000, but the violent guy next door does, then I'm bound to become suddenly violent as well. Now hand me my $1000, bee!
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
Between its numerous welfare programs, the US already effectively has a "UBI":
Earth has always had a solution for one group of animals failing to thrive. Natural selection. If you cannot function in modern society, why should the rest of the productive citizenry pick up your slack? Its dead easy to get a job in the USA now with unemployment so low. That is, unless you are lazy or dumb. Let the critically violent and unemployed just die out, to be replaced with the offspring of the successful. Eventually (as has happened for billions of years) the entire population will just be the offspring of the successful, and we will probably be better off overall as a species. Giving handouts just encourages welfare dependency and dysgenics (lookup the work of Richard Lynn).
Excerpt found a few years ago
Well beyond the fact that the Libs will eventually run out of other peoples money to spend, their real problem (and that of the Socialist, and Communist, and to some extend the Facist...) is that they try, and inevitably fail at changing human nature.
The sign at the park reads "Do not feed the wildlife". Ask the park Ranger why. "Because they will grow used to it, and lose the ability to care for themselves". The same government that runs the park is the same government that hands food and shelter to just about anyone with their hand out.
My Liberal mother..... used exhort me to feed the birds, to put nuts out for squirrels, to be kind (aka "nice") to God's furry creatures who don't have enough to eat. That woman used to lay a guilt trip on me! How I crawled out of her womb... is a wonder to me, but I digress.
Well, the Libs do the same thing on a mass scale... but even worse. My well meaning mom never purposefully created entire populations of little furry creatures. The Libs have.
Are they also going to identify which kids are the bullies in school so they can pay them lunch money every day?
I have a novel idea! Why not pay people to work? Surely there are places in that backwards city that need to be cleaned up, grass to be cut, trees to be trimmed, cars to be washed, you get the idea.
By definition, I have, in some way, earned any money that someone else voluntarily gives me. I have, in some way, provided value that justifies the cash.
You may not see the value, but the person giving me that money certainly does, or the money would not be forthcoming.
Note, I said *voluntarily*. Government takings (taxes) and redistributions (welfare) do not constitute "voluntary". And those monies are not earned. So yeah, a lot of money changing hands in our society is not earned. Nothing of value is provided in exchange for it.
(In all these debates about "income inequality", why do I never hear a debate about "output inequality"?)
It wouldn't count toward overtime. And it would probably only be a fraction of an equivalent hourly wage. This will encentivize large and affluent businesses to help develope and subsidize nice and affordable nearby housing or a train system to get to the housing quickly. More than an hour commute each way is rediculous.
Does that make the government culpable when I go off the rails and go on a shooting spree?
UBI only works based on the theory it will eliminate other wasteful government programs. This is a fallacy. Government bureaucracies have grown in Western civilization to the point of being more about self perpetuation than being about serving the taxpayers. They and public unions will never go away. Trying to significantly cut the size of government would literally lead to a civil war.
UBI will end up as just another layer of government bloat and waste and will still have all the negative aspects (lazy people being paid to be lazy, hard working people feeling resentful, wider divide between the classes as a result). Nothing good will come of this.
> And what do you do when there is no jobs left for the people that lack qualifications?
Time to invent robots that collect useless people and process them in bioreactors to get some useful energy output!
If I'm not violent enough for $1000/month payment, I'll work real hard on my rage skill to improve my violence. ARRRRRRRGGGGGHH!
but don't support the Universal part then you don't support UBI. By the same token if you claim to be Conservative but support sweeping government & societal changes then you're not Conservative. Words have meaning. It's time we start calling people on it when they misuse words, especially when it's for the express purpose of deceit.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I know from a personal experience that it is extremely difficult to get sufficient care for someone who is severely mentally disturbed, especially if he or she is intelligent enough to fake sanity once in a while. In many cases a shooter's family was concerned about the person prior to the incident, and even attempted to seek help, but it isn't easy to just have someone committed (example: Jared Lee Loughner). So before we give people money to buy guns, how about we find a way to provide psychiatric care for such people who really need it?
Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
So no cop has earned any money? No fireman? How voluntary does it have to be? Does the CEO of a hospital earn any money in your estimation? After all, very few CHOOSE to go to the hospital, but when they need one, they;re over a barrel (literally agree or die).
Does it count when a group of CEOs sit on each other's boards and grant each other huge raises (paid with other people's money)?
How about the money a professional grifter brings in? Does it matter if the grifter is Goldman Sachs?
That is actually my entire response to the second part of this story. Thanks.
It just encourages more people to be threatening for the stipend. The counseling and case management will go away or become a joke and all the program will end up doing is bribing violent people not to be violent - which they will be anyway because it is their nature.
E Proelio Veritas.
Unless I'm mistaken, the whole reason folks are blaming / going after the guns instead of the person behind it is due to the difficulty of predicting who is going to snap and go on a rampage.
Did California just magically fix that little problem and can now identify " potential shooters " ?
I also don't see where bribing folks to behave is going to end well. This is one of those things where throwing money at it isn't going to work.
Then we could reduce spending in the form of the DEA! AND on jails and prisons!
We'd need a good name for it, though. We could call it "freedom"?
I robbed banks specifically because I couldn't escape poverty. I'm not saying I'm the best guy ever to live, but let's not pretend that poverty doesn't cause crime.
You guys make me literally laugh out loud every time you say "assault weapon". It's a joke on people who don't know anything at all about firearms.
The term does have a definition, defined by federal law. You can look it up if you want to. If you don't know what any of the words mean, what a "receiver" or "magazine" is, or "semiautomatic", here's a summary for you:
An assault weapon is one that looks scary.
It could be a plinker, a .22 like kids used to use to shoot cans in the backyard, if it's shaped like an AK and it's black than it's an assault weapon.
UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME.
I know it's a pilot, but come on, this doesn't take a lot of braincells to figure out. The entire concept hinges on UNIVERSAL. You don't have to have any special need, in fact, the way it's supposed to work in theory, you can even have a job.
Bottom line, this pilot isn't going to tell you jack about how this is going to work cuz you're not doing it right. It's UNIVERSAL, everyone needs to get it, or your test is null and void.
I'd even go as far to say, your pilot is folly, you're going to create resentments in the community cuz someone is getting a free lunch and someone else isn't. That's not how this idea works. For it to work, EVERYONE gets a free lunch, if they want.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. That still holds true even if you put a few shillings into the sow's ear.
Stockton is a cesspool of crime. The mayor is an idiot, elected because the previous mayor was a criminal.
There is probably a very small percentage of people for whom a $500/mo stipend can change their lives. I would say maybe 0.01% of the poor in Stockton. Those would be e.g elderly or truly disabled, or chronically ill. However, even for those people, changing your lifestyle is a bad idea if the program you're on is "experimental." Best not change anything until it's permanent.
The one good thing is that this will inject money into the local economy. Rents will rise to absorb the extra cash, and meth will become more expensive, and welfare moms will pop out a few more mouths for the state to feed.
OK, I have heard enough from Californians to know that they will be giving the money to upper middle class white men.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Actually this is the most sensible post of all of them. One recent study revealed that there are families where no one has held a real job in 5 generations. Yes you've read that right. Intergenerational poverty. Paying people to be sterilized makes perfect sense. As long as it's voluntary there shouldn't be a problem.
This can't possibly work, because of a Supreme Court decision back around the 1970's. Up until then local social support had been able to be limited to residents of the area, but the Supreme Court decided that this was forbidden. This instituted a race to the bottom, because any locale that decided to be generous to it's unfortunate residents had to be generous to the entire country.
So this, likewise, can't work. And for the same reason. You don't need to go into details of the plan, if it's more than averagely generous, and it gets in the news, the plan will be swamped.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Have gnu, will travel.
You're telling me that you can invest in people as you can invest in companies?! And some of them might even succeed?! So you're telling me that investing in people is better then investing in the "economy" because the people are the economy?! Nevermind, GM just said they're "too big to fail" so we're giving 4 billion dollars to them.
Or pay for that hoopty.
Thanks, asshole. I'm at urgent care getting two stitches from your fucking edge.
Lol predict total flop.
Surely a great dis incentive for finding work for people on Social Security is that they lose so much of it so quickly even for part-time work dissuading them from entering into perhaps much more work through this perhaps Social Security could be given for one year irrespective of part-time income to help people get established and on their feet and perhaps entrenched enough into their work so that they will keep going
Lol, huffpo garbage.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The mentally ill shooters are a small blip in total gun crime compared to the criminals, both petty and organized, who are responsible for the majority of gun homicides. Considering the stipend is contingent on involvement of social workers and things like addition treatment, it should be pretty clear that this isn't a bribe but rather an effort to provide a pathway off the street for people who live dangerous and desperate lives. In some communities on the margins, it's not uncommon for male teenagers to grow up in an environment where it's practically inevitable that their first and only job will involve selling drugs. Fighting this dynamic solely with force of law obviously doesn't work, because the problem isn't really getting any better. If I remember correctly, homicides are about the same year over year and the only thing we're seeing more of now are reports of police abusing and overzealously persecuting minorities. Some politicians with big hearts are starting to propose social programs aimed at giving people who were raised in environments of crime and desperation a pathway out into a healthier place in society.
Now show us some evidence that the people who are getting the most money in our society are actually earning any of it.
That is a fair point; however, show us the absurdly wealthy who are incapable of shirking their tax burdens. This money will be taken from people who are working and earning their money. If we want UBI, it should start by removing direct taxes from citizens.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Let's see, bribe psychopaths and criminals to not be evil... How has that worked out for the US historically, in say places like Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Afghanistan, etc... Not so well I think. So why should we expect that kind of failed policy to work in society at large? How about we just teach people skills, that allow them to employ themselves, and not rely on the government or corporations?
It doesn't scale up; all you need is a four-banger calculator to figure that out. Enough already.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
... do I have to shoot to get my $1,000/month? Do I have to kill them, or just maim them?
The reason our tax code is so complex is exactly to let the very wealthy weasel out of their taxes. The same forces that will eventually cause UBI can as well remove the dozens of loopholes in the tax code.
Comment removed based on user account deletion