Basic Income?
What should be done in the USA in order to obtain a better distribution of wealth?
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
18 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.We can agree that all students are born with the same ability. We can agree that all students have access to the same high school education. But can we agree that all students have access to equal college education? I dunno because a family has to be able to afford a college education.
Is a financially disadvantaged high school student attending the same school as a wealthy student at a disadvantage for success? maybe. Which is harder on a student, wealth or race??
Grecio
Level 7
July 21, 2019
0
I guess the question is " How do we get some of the major corporation profit out of the hands of the stockholders and back into the hands of the workers? Increasing the minimum wage sounds like the answer but it might not be. Likely, the cost of goods will go up to compensate.
In a way, the government is subsidizing fast food corporations by paying food stamps, housing, and medical to workers that earn minimum wage 20-30 hours per week without benefits.
Grecio
Level 7
July 15, 2019
0
You first have to decide what is 'better distribution of wealth' If it is to take money from some and give it to others - how do you justify it and how do you do it?
You can not place a high tax burden on the wealthy, because the wealthy can move abroad and many will, reducing tax revenue overall
Does someone who does not work have a right to be financially supported by his neighbour who is struggling with 2 jobs?
Education should give everyone the skills to enable them to make a path in life - after that you choos which path and find your way through it
The question steps into a quagmire of moral and philosophical issues
ShadowAmicus
Level 8
July 12, 2019
1
You are ignoring how AI and robotics are eliminating jobs. All the education in the world is not going to provide most people with an income in the middle part of this century. The neighbor working 2 jobs is not who'd be supporting him. It would be the billionaire owning the companies that are eliminating jobs thru automation and thus saving on benefits and Social Security payments for workers. Let the billionaires move away if they like, but also restrict their ability to come back and visit the US for business or pleasure as well as being able to own homes here. That might well cut down on the number of tax-dodging expatriates......
Your Agnostic group memberships are hidden in your profile, but I'm guessing you're a conservative...
@TomMcGiverin back in the day the same argument was made about the spinning jenny taking workers jobs and steam powered boats taking sailmakers jobs...... technology changes some work roles, but others are created
@ShadowAmicus That's not at all happening this time. The jobs are being eliminated and few or no new jobs are created by the tech changes. Most of the new or open jobs these days are in so called low skill or low wage jobs like food service or home health care, at least until those jobs are eliminated for robots. We now have driverless trucks and trains, for example, and no new jobs are created with the changes, only a net job loss.....
@TomMcGiverin for each new machine here is a need to maintain and repair. but most new jobs are in service industries based around mass consumerism - it is a worry. The massively expanding population is exacerbating the problem
@ShadowAmicus In a city near me there is a production plant of a company that used to be called Ball Containers. They made glass and plastic jars, bottles, etc. The plant is now almost completely automated, with a few humans around doing the repair and maintainence you describe. It was a net loss of hundreds of jobs...
@TomMcGiverin the same is happening in many factories. ..and office functions, and it is an upheaval and tragedy for those directly affected .... but this is a process of change that has been happening since the start of the industrialised age .. it will not stop, but there are different jobs being created, but most people have the old job skills and need the new job skills
@ShadowAmicus But since nowadays few employers are willing to train workers on new skills and college costs are too expensive for most workers, how are the workers to get the new skills? The govt. sure isn't going to pick up the cost in most cases, not here in the US.
You could try a liberal socialist system of government. See Germany for an example of how it can work. Remember socialism isn't Leninist communism.
Plus you'd get superb education and a health service free at the point of need. And the trains run on time!
Sofabeast
Level 7
July 12, 2019
1
The first option would push the super wealthy away from the USA - this happened in the UK during the late 1960s. This removes wealth.
Basic income - this may have to become universal paid for by taxation of automation, as automation takes jobs (not Mexicans)
Better education, this hasn't really been tried in the USA yet. Currently only the minimum level has been provided. A study demonstrated this back in the 1970s by Samuel Bowels & Herbert Gintis which supported that education in the USA is aimed at production of workers through directed education to fulfill the needs of the employers not the people.
Sofabeast
Level 7
July 12, 2019
1
Elvis was almost as rich as his god(s)!
He always paid his taxes at rates between 50 to 79 percent without question!
of-the-mountain
Level 9
July 12, 2019
2
You need to allow for multiple votes per person. I would vote for both of the first two options. We need a basic income, as prez candidate Andrew Yang has proposed, and it needs to be paid for with taxes on the super wealthy and with a tax on Wall Street firms speculating on trades. Between automation and AI, most jobs will be eliminated over time, so better education for all is not the answer as most jobs will be actually lower-skilled and lower-paying in the future as more are eliminated. Having free college available would be a social good in itself as we would have a more informed and more critically-thinking public, but it will not help us in finding employment for everyone, that's why we need a UBI. The rich, however, have no interest in paying for it, as it would benefit only unneeded workers that don' help them make profits. They don't even want to pay their fair share as it is to fund Social Security and Medicare, as they don't need it themselves at all.
TomMcGiverin
Level 8
July 12, 2019
2
The U.S. was never stronger than when we taxed the super rich.
JasonTomerlin2
Level 6
July 12, 2019
3
Tax the wealthy and corporations. Anyone who thinks this is wrong is either wealthy or stupid. When bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks he said, "because that is where the money is". DUH! Better education is also necessary for sure. Basic income for all Americans is probably in the future since there will be more people than jobs.
Sticks48
Level 9
July 12, 2019
3
I see that increasing the tax on the wealthy is far behind in the poll. It is absolutely necessary however. The power gap created by the under taxing of billionaires has not only directly led to dangerous levels of income disparity, it also has several less obvious but even greater indirect effects. The amount of economic and political power that our recent tax policies have placed in the hands of a very few, threaten western democracy. These policies have also left our entire country in a state of perpetual poverty, in spite of what the GDP numbers portray. The result of the power imbalance has been to warp the free market system through the creation of regulations which were written by trade groups and enacted by corporate puppet politicians that greatly hinder competition in nearly every market segment. It may be too late to replace our current plutocracy with a true democratic republic, but we need to keep trying. In the past, plutocracies have had only ended one way, total economic collapse due to violent revolution. So far though, it looks like we haven't learned anything from history.
Seminarian
Level 7
July 12, 2019
3
I agree with you about the future of America being total collapse, followed by violent revolution. However, I am not hopeful about the good guys and the common people winning that revolution. What I predict is that instead, after the total economic collapse we get a military crackdown with martial law on the part of the feds, Homeland Security, the US Army and National Guard, all crushing any protest (similar to what the local police and the feds did to crush the Occupy movement years ago) against a fascist takeover with no more charade of democracy and elections. The fascists will come out in the open with members of both the Repub and Dem parties serving as members of a one-party dictatorship controlled by the rich and corporations, as is our present system. If you want to see the film version, check out the Purge movie series. The movie series's New Founding Fathers Of America Party already exists and its members are the corporate pols in DC of both parties. I only hope I am dead by then.....
AOC seems ultra-liberal but good point she makes is the USA would have plenty of money if we did not spend about 50% of our budget on military. Why don't we tell all nations that if you won't fight and hate us then we will build 10 hospitals in your country?
Grecio
Level 7
July 12, 2019
2
Because they will eat us alive!
Well we tried that. (Sort of.)
Foreign medical aid is viewed as cultural imperialism at best in many parts of the world, and as a CIA plot at worst. (Not helped, of course, by the fact that the CIA often does travel using "doctor" as a cover identity.)
Polio was nearly wiped out by the UN's vaccination program, until radical Islamist clerics in Africa began spreading a rumor that the vaccine was secretly designed to sterilize Muslims and wipe out their religion- as if there is some way a vaccine can detect religion. Parents refused to let their children get the vital second part of the immunization. Polio once again began spreading and we were back to square 1.
Hatred is not rational. Trying to bribe people who already hate you isn't going to work. It will be seen as weakness and and an invitation to attack.
I'm not saying we need a Cold War level military commitment, but we do need an agile military that can support our allies and deal with threats before they reach us. American interests are not just on American soil. We are engaged in the world whether we like it or not.
Well paying jobs... It's the best way to fix financial woes.
Captain_Feelgood
Level 8
July 12, 2019
1
CEOs for major corporations earn $800 million a year while the basic worker earns $8 per hour. Does that seem fair to you?
@Grecio Maybe there should be a limit on high income based on the lowest paid employee. If Joe CEO makes a million a year including benefits and a limit of say 20 times what the the lowest paid employee makes is in place, the lowest paid would be 50,000 a year including benefits. If Joe CEO wants more money, the lowest paid employee also gets a raise in income.
@Grecio What ever the boss thinks the CEO deserves is what they should earn. That's none of my business. Fairness has nothing to do with it. Do you think a Brain Surgeon should be paid the same as a Truck Driver?
@Captain_Feelgood Fairness has everything to do with it. When a company's profits tank, the CEO isn't the one fired. The CEO is the one who says, "We need to restructure the company and make the hard choices and by the way, we're firing 30 percent of our work force. And I'm getting a 20 percent raise due to my hard choices."
There are no hard choices involved at the executive level. The CEO and board members are all friends who recommend raises for one another. It doesn't matter if the company performs or not, they still get their raises and bonuses. If the company did well, it's a bonus for profiting. If profits went down, it's a bonus for not doing worse. But no matter what, the people who do the eight and ten and twelve hour shifts get table scraps if they even get to keep their jobs.
No, it's not fair. The executives would not have a company without the workers, but they operate under the delusion that they made it all happen.
@Paul4747 You've obviously never been in a top Executive position at a Corporation.. You don't understand how the gears work.. It's hilarious that you say "When a company's profits tank, the CEO isn't the one fired. The CEO is the one who says, "We need to restructure the company and make the hard choices. And by the way, we're firing 30 percent of our work force." like that's a bad thing.. If there's a problem in the company, you take drastic measures to correct the problem.. That's what happens.. You want to vilify the one making that decision when he fires 30% of the workforce, he is in fact saving the jobs of the other 70%. Okay, you go right ahead... We're done here.. Have a good day. 
@Paul4747 And by the way,,, the workers wouldn't have a job without the CEOs.. just so you know..
@Mark013 You start a Corporation and let me know how that strategy goes. 
@Captain_Feelgood and the CEOs would not have jobs without the workers. They just pack up the jobs and move them to other countries. But they remain citizens of the US so they don't have to pay a penny in taxes 
@Captain_Feelgood What has starting a corporation have to do with what their salary is? If a company is profitable it should invest in either expanding the company or increasing wages fairly. No reason why someone should be making hundreds of times what the employees make. I was an upper manager, I got raises, bonuses, perks. Yet when I wanted to give the employees in my charge a pittance of a raise after the wages were frozen for two years, I got a lot of push back from my superiors even though during those two years all of the management still received increases.
@Captain_FeelgoodThose "CEO"s wouldn't have huge salaries, without the labor of workers.
@Captain_Feelgood "He's saving the jobs of the other 70 percent" by making a salary equal to 361 of them on average. Normally, you would expect someone whose company didn't perform to take a pay cut, not get a raise.
Yeah, we're done here.
@Captain_Feelgood I am just trying to say that in many corporations the wage has not grown with the profit of the companies during the last 50 years. The profits are being shared with stockholders but not with the average worker. In the past unions have helped increase wages but that seems to have gone with the past now. I dunno.
A, B & C
And if you mean a living wage when you say "provide a basic income", that's what I agree with too.
chucklesIII
Level 7
July 12, 2019
2
The poverty level for a couple with 3 kids is $24,000 per year. If a man earns $15 per hour then he will earn about $30,000. Where I live, the average wage is $30,000 per year. In my South Georgia county, 68% of the families live at or below the poverty level.
@Grecio That's terrible!
@Grecio , also, I helped a couple friends move out of South Georgia last year. They were in Albany and I'm sure the poverty rate was close to what you are saying.
@chucklesIII You know what's weird? Last year or so a hurricane hit southwest Georgia with has the poorest counties in Georgia. The church I attend with my wife (who is a Christian) took up $1000s of dollars for backpacks for poor kids and sent them to North Carolina. Go figure.
@Grecio I'm not religious but Holy Shit!
Why don't we call it endovement for the lazy?
zesty
Level 7
July 12, 2019
1
Hahahahaha. Seems that way. Lots of Mexicans work on farms around where I live. They do jobs that ordinary Americans won't do, like pick watermelons, peas, and other produce. If we kicked them all out, then I guess we just wouldn't be able to eat produce anymore. Americans will not work out in a hot fiels all day to pick tomatoes and butterbeans and squash.
@Grecio Mmmmm ... bullshit... I still work in my fields, I pick tomatoes and beans and peppers in my fields.. right along with anyone that works for me... Every farmer I know around me does the same thing.. Grant it, I don't run a 4,000 acre farm. Mine is only 130 acres, and it's more of a hobby than a business. I'm retired, and still a young 56 years old.. So you have to put some things in perspective..
@Captain_Feelgood When I say work in the fields I mean spend 8-10 hours each day pulling produce. Around here one does not see an American working in a field picking by hand. Now we do see Americans driving tractors and pulling automated equipment. We see buses carrying 30-50 migrants to the field. I think most of these migrants have work permits but they earn money and spend much of it back to Mexico. Mexicans around here work very hard and are prized by employers for their hard work.
Most people agree that one could take all the wealth in the USA and divide it equally among everybody, and within 10 years all the wealth would be back in the hands of the same people.
Grecio
Level 7
July 12, 2019
0
I don't agree .I call bullshit.lol
I doubt you have talked to most people. That sounds very Trumpian.
@Bigwavedave I have heard that all my life. maybe take 20 years.
@Bigwavedave, @Sticks48 Some people have a knack for making money and a drive to be wealthy. Some don't.
Someday something has to be done about the divide between the super wealthy and the poor in the USA and maybe the whole world. For whatever reason most of the wealth in the world is above the equator. In the USA the top 5% of Americans have 80% of the wealth. I believe also in health-care for all but I don't want it run by the government because it will be screwed up if the government does it.
Grecio
Level 7
July 12, 2019
1
Why do you presume the government would screw it up?
Our highway system is run by a combination of federal, state and local governments and for the most part does a good job. I believe any sort of national healthcare would be along the same lines. The only other way I can envision healthcare for all would be to require all insurance companies to become not for profit institutions.
I can’t think of any country that has government run healthcare that’s screwed it up so badly that they’ve reverted to private, for profit insurance companies - perhaps we’d be the first, but I’m a little more optimistic
They do pretty well with Medicare and Medicaid. You would rather have an insurance company, whose main goal is to make huge amounts of money and paying shareholders. In what Universe does that make any sense. There are examples all over the planet of government run healthcare, all with better results than us. That is fact!
@Haemish1 Maybe you are correct, I dunno really. I guess the government runs Medicare and Medicare pays lower hospital costs than private insurance. Maybe a one payer system might be less expensive. However, I hear (no statistics) that other countries that have national insurance have long waiting lists for surgeries.
I don't like any of the choices...the super rich and business should pay their share if taxes, but it will take more than just that.
Bigwavedave
Level 8
July 12, 2019
4
Got any suggestions?
We might somehow guarantee a job for every American but many will just not work no matter what. Many are too stupid or lazy to do most any job.
We might increase the minimum wage but many jobs will be lost because owners won't pay $15 per hour. Also, the price of goods will just go up to compensate.
If we place a 70% tax on all earning more than 200 million annually then these people will leave the USA and take their business elsewhere.
@Grecio Exactly what I have been saying.. So you are not paying attention. A country, city, state has to have money to provide infrastructure and services. Are you going to get it from the poor? You get it from the folks who have the money. Oh yeah, that's the rich. The people are making $7.41 an hour because that is what the rich and business owners are paying them.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.