Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Basic Income Plz

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 12, 2011, 4 p.m. EST by limited (0)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/counties/36061 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee

I would like to live in a country with an issuance of money to every INDIVIDUAL every two weeks amounting to at least the greatest LIVING WAGE, a "Citizens wage of at least a living wage" if you will. Citizenship shouldn't be required, but redundance could be, like crossing the yellow line on route 16 in Bergen County, New Jersey (just over the GW bridge)

48 Comments

48 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 12 years ago

The government as “employer of last resort,” guaranteeing a living wage to anyone who wants to work, is a basic platform of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). An MMT website declares that by “[e]nding the enormous unearned profits acquired by the means of the privatization of our sovereign currency. . . it is possible to have truly full employment without causing inflation.”

http://economics.arawakcity.org/node/674

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/rights.php

[-] 1 points by DudleyE (94) 12 years ago

If you would like to live in a country like that, there are some to choose from. China and Cuba are among them, go for it!

[-] 1 points by sickmint79 (516) from Grayslake, IL 12 years ago

if you need something, and you don't have enough money, and charity can't provide it, then the final backstop should be the government. and it should give you money directly for that thing. ie. food stamps, money for poor for food. generic income, or giving everyone a set amount of food stamps, are both bad ideas.

[-] 1 points by SalGuinea (2) 12 years ago
[-] 1 points by NortonSound (176) 12 years ago

Can you say runaway inflation? Think about it. if every one was taxed at 99% then the cost of every product would drop accordingly to attract the remaining available dollars in the market. On the reverse, it every one was taxed nothing, prices would rise in the free enterprise market to take in the larger pool of available dollars in the market. I believe your point is to mock those asking for a living wage and benefits, but no matter what level of income an individual earns or is given, the price of products and services will eventually adjust to absorb what the market will bear. Hiring, firing, laying off, building staff, in an economy that is only conscious of the top earners will result in many fewer successful suppliers to the big spenders, and is also no answer. What is the answer? A consistent, realistic market that aproaches economics aware of the limitations of exchange of paper money for goods and services. Going to the extremes of hiring or firing only creates great swings as the price rises and falls to fit into the average income level and supply needs. The longer the market can remain sensible and trustable, the more time there is for every one to find work, a livable wage and benefits. The tide of boom and bust is too strong to support any but the strong, and that is not Darwinian. Darwin did not say that only the strong survive, the strong die out too, he said that if one does not adapt to changing conditions then they do not survive to reproduce. With fewer swings in the economy, there is less need to be brutally strong or to be adapting on a weekly basis, and even a small percentage profit per annum will in the course of a business lifetime be enough to fulfil most any American dream. How do you like them apples?

[-] 1 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 12 years ago

I will quit my job and hang out on the beach all day.

Will someone please bring me a Margaretta.........oh.......nobody is working?.....everyone is hanging out on the beach with me?

Who's going to make all of our Margaretta's?

Damn.....this deal sucks.

I want my old job back.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

What do you think that amount of money should be, on average, in the US?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

What I don't get is why don't people have the right to survive? With respect to your idea, what I think is a little bit more fair is that people can at least live every day without worrying about food, shelter, water, clothes, etc? Just those basic neccessities that could be granted to all U.S. Citizens could do wonders. The crime rate would go down significantly, the economy would go up, happiness would go up and so would respect for all life.

[-] 1 points by AMH (123) 12 years ago

I think the problem here is that people take an all or nothing approach. Communism/socialism solves the fairness problem, making sure everyone gets an equal slice of the pie. Capitalism solves the motivation problem, making sure there's plenty of pie to go around. Communism/socialism fails at the motivation problem, because who wants to bake a pie only to get one bite? Capitalism fails at the fairness problem, because why would you share when you went to all that effort and they didn't? We need a middle ground. Sharing and motivation. What if we all owned the corporations, so we all get an equal share in the profits, but we still could get ahead by doing the hard work it takes to create wealth?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Hmm...You say it eloquently and I agree.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

Honestly now, how often do you hear of someone in the US starving to death or dying in the elements due to lack of shelter? No one in the US is denied the right to survive.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

you know very little about this - or so it seems - ever been to nyc in the winter - you don't think those people feeze to death sometimes - in this country we have no right to live - if you cannot make enough money to survive then crawl under a bridge and die - land of the free and home of the brave my ass - you must be in middle school - i thought all these dopey people were being paid - now i think maybe they are all 12 yr olds getting some kicks

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

I don't know where your from but around here (New England) we give the poor free food, free health care, and a free place to live. How much more do you need to survive?

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

are you for real? nobody goes hungry or freezes in new england - even your brown folks are well taken care of - that's great - bill russell and bobby bonds will be very happy - how old are you - 12? Feb 5, 2003 – For example, a homeless advocacy group in Boston says a shocking 151 homeless died in that city last winter, including a two-month-old baby.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

Did they actually freeze to death or just die? There is a difference. There are shelters available for those looking for them who want them.

And yes, no one in New England, or really anywhere in America, starves to death due to lack of food. It just does not happen.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

start reading - i would start with that great boston prof - howard zinn. i am thinking you are not 12 yet right?

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

I am actually 6. My dog types the post for me, I just dictate.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

my 6 yr old grandson types - you are lagging behind your peers - read howard zinn when you develop the skills - nobody starves or freezes - wow

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

You would be surprised. There's not enough room in the shelters, not enough food to go around, and there's LONG waits for anything.

You ever been homeless?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

If there is not enough room in the homeless shelters then how is the Occupy movement helping anybody by taking up space in homeless shelters?

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/occupy-atlanta-protester-pulls-1216461.html

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

another dumb remark - where did you get that idea - glen beck - techjunkie - get on the internet and get some info before you spout off

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

Where did I get the idea that there is not enough room in the homeless shelters? I was responding to the quote immediately before mine that said, "There's not enough room in the shelters."

Where did I get the idea that there are 100 Occupy protesters taking up space in a homeless shelter in Atlanta? Multiple news sources.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

well one more strike against the south - can't even run an occupy site - come to nyc and see how it is done - cold here too - lincoln should have let the south go - crackers and rednecks - oh, boy i am getting cranky - sorry to be harsh on atlanta but if what you say is true they should get on the bus and see the big apple

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

You're really good at insulting people. That's cool I guess. Go 99%! (Except for the crackers, and the rednecks, and the dumb Glenn Beck fans, and ...")

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 12 years ago

and you are just average at insulting people?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Honestly, I don't think it's a help, but what can most of these people do? Also, that dude is responsible for himself only. Just because someone supports a movement and does something stupid does not mean they represent the movement as a whole. It's comprised of different people with different beliefs.

That was a stupid move, though.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

I wasn't even talking about that dude, what about the 100 Occupy protesters in Atlanta who are consuming space and resources at a homeless shelter? If there isn't enough space, then doesn't that represent 100 homeless people who have to sleep on the streets so that Occupy protesters can have food and shelter?

The line between an Occupy protester and a homeless person seems to be getting blurrier every day. I'm not sure how many of the 99% are going to support a hobo movement.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Anyone can be a occupy protester. So I don't think there's any line to establish. And if one is sincerely homeless then that person belongs in the homeless shelter, or out getting a job if he/she is able to, or doing whatever he/she feels like (nothing else to do).

You make a good point like QuietDay said. However, if those protesters have no home, no friends, and nowhere to stay (from sincere background, not because they choose to be homeless), then what shall they do?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

If a person chooses to spend their time blaming other people for their problems instead of working to better themselves and improve their own situation, then they're going to be homeless for a long time so they should just get used to sleeping in homeless shelters.

[-] 1 points by QuietDay (59) 12 years ago

I think this is a good point. I don't think it's neccesary to camp out and drain the already limited resources of those who are most deeply effected by economic injustice and inequality. It doesn't make sense and is hypocritical in my opinion.

Go home, get online if you can, come out and protest during the day. Protesters will be more politically effective warm, clothed and fed than they are shivering out in the street in cramped, unsanitary and often personally unsafe living conditions that drain resources from those that really need them. I just don't see the point of it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

It kind of reminds me of the Oakland protesters causing 11,000 workers at the Port of Oakland to lose wages -- in the name of protesting the plight of the working man. With friends like those protesters, who needs enemies?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

1 in 6 americans are struggling to get enough to eat. 1 in 15 americans are in poverty. In 2009, there was about 49 million in poverty. Just in 2009..

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 12 years ago

I love the idea, don't get me wrong. But when there is a guaranteed income, and everyone quits his or her job, who will grow the food? I'm looking forward to spending my time fishing, but I don't want to live on fish (and quite frankly, I'm not that good a fisherman).

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Well..the guaranteed income thing I'm not so sure on. But what about giving every u.s. citizen food, shelter, and water? So at least many people do not waste away just worrying about these simple things, and can instead focus on greater and productive matters in life. Perhaps we could give people who are struggling a chance to be productive in return for survival neccessities. Or maybe setting one price for all homes..Or perhaps, letting people grow food and hemp in their plot of land in return for income? Hemp could be used as our source of bio-diesel, flour, clothes, and soy-bean base, etc. It has alot of positives. If a good amount is grown in an area, it is believed it could purify our air, water, and soil..reverse greenhouse effects.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 12 years ago

Don't worry about that. You're entitled to spend your days fishing and not worrying about anything.

(I think that the theory is that the 1% should pay for us to send our days fishing, since they can pay to spend their own days fishing. And if they won't pay for us to spend our days fishing then the government is supposed to compel them to pay up.)

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

Again, do you actually hear of people starving to death, as is commonplace in other parts of the world, here in the US? There will always be poor people. No one here in the US is actually struggling to survive.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Yes. I went through it. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The deplorable conditions are especially worse in large cities.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

If it is such common place for people in the US to actually starve to death, then please show me a link to an article about someone who, despite their best efforts, actually starved to death in the US.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

No, it's not commonplace. It's actually hidden well. Over 11 million children are hungry.

http://www.bread.org/hunger/us/

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

I am hungry right now. No one in the US actually starves to death though. The poor in the US are very fortunate that they live in the US.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Hungry as in they have low food security and go to bed hungry every night. Please don't be ignorant.

Yes, they have it better than any other country but the fact that this country even has that large amount of people in poverty says books about how we view life and make policies surrounding our beliefs.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

We give people in poverty free food, free healthcare, and in a lot of places free housing. What more do they really need to survive?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

Yes, but the problem is that too many people are using up these resources and alot of people are being left without.

The homeless shelter in Downtown miami I used to go to closed at 6pm everyday (9pm on sundays). On a regular weekday, you need to be there before 3 or everything will be taken up, all the food will be gone, and you will be turned away. I learned this the hard way, after wasting the precious 5 dollars I found (after a long time of looking) to travel all the way to downtown, and being turned away, and then praying to god I don't get raped/killed while sleeping on the bus bench for week. My 'free healthcare' took two months to respond to me about a simple question after calling thousands of times, and I got turned around at every corner, and thus had to waste precious time that I could have been going to the doctor and getting over a simple cold that was a nightmare to survive. Free housing is a joke.

Again, have you ever been homeless and had no one/nothing to depend on?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 12 years ago

I hear New England is beautiful. If I muster up enough money again, I'll definitely make a stop there.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 12 years ago

No, but I work with them all day. Come up to New England, it is not like that here for our poor.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 12 years ago

Then we could all quit our jobs and spend our days fishing. Sign me up.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 12 years ago

Yes! That's where we're heading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Z8TR4ToNs

[-] 0 points by VladimirMayakovsky (796) 12 years ago

We already have this. It is called the minimum wage.