Whatever man if you care more about macroeconomics than actually helping people that’s a pretty sociopathic take. We could easily pay for a ubi with tax reform and it is one of those things that generates more money than we put into it, but what do I know, I’m someone you assume is an idiot.
Whatever man if you care more about macroeconomics than actually helping people that’s a pretty sociopathic take.
If you think you can help people at a national scale without macroeconomics then you are a moron.
We could easily pay for a ubi with tax reform
Again, under the original premise tax reform would already be occurring to pay for people’s basic needs…you know, the thing that UBI is supposed to partially cover.
it is one of those things that generates more money than we put into i
In our current economy…not in one where people’s basic needs are already being met.
The theory of UBI generating more money than it cost relies on the fact that covering some people’s basic needs increases their productivity. In the economic theory we were talking about their needs would already be fully covered. Meaning there wouldn’t be an increase in productivity, meaning UBI would not generate more money than it cost.
but what do I know, I’m someone you assume is an idiot.
In all fairness, what you are claiming is pretty idiotic.
Even in communist countries where people’s most basic needs are fully covered by the government, they don’t the receiver free checks from the government, in fact in most of them it’s illegal to be unemployed for long periods. Arguably productivity is even more important in planned and centralized economies, and a UBI with a socialized system would just motivate people not to work.
That’s pretty fucking stupid since people worked on stuff outside of subsistence farming well before money existed. You’re so wrapped up in how things are and how you think things should work you’re not seeing anything potential. In your bleak worldview humanity must enslave itself. Maybe if you had a perspective that was more focused on the happiness and well-being of humans you could use that oh-so-massive big brain of yours to figure out a way for people to have their needs met and have a functioning society, but your motivations are clearly set in a different direction.
That’s pretty fucking stupid since people worked on stuff outside of subsistence farming well before money existed.
Economics existed before capitalism… Macroeconomics does not solely consist of the evaluation of currency. You can do a modern economic evaluation of subsistence farming communities, or a historical macroeconomic evaluation of previous societies.
Macroeconomics studies large scale forces of the economy, like a population’s effect on productivity, labor policy, government type, taxation, or even how weather will affect food growth.
In your bleak worldview humanity must enslave itself.
Lol, even in economies where people equally own the means of production, individual people still have to be productive…
You are just a lazy ass who wants to receive the benefits of a socially and economically equitable society without labouring for it.
figure out a way for people to have their needs met and have a functioning society, but your motivations are clearly set in a different direction.
I started this conversation by arguing we should have a system that already insured our needs were met… You just want your needs met and then extra money so you can be a lazy ass and not contribute anything to society.
UBI is a scam that billionaires put forward because they know cutting a check for 500 bucks every month is a hell of a lot cheaper alternative than providing food, education, housing, and healthcare.
Maybe learn a iota about the economy before you start gargling Andrew Yang’s ballsack…
Whatever man if you care more about macroeconomics than actually helping people that’s a pretty sociopathic take. We could easily pay for a ubi with tax reform and it is one of those things that generates more money than we put into it, but what do I know, I’m someone you assume is an idiot.
If you think you can help people at a national scale without macroeconomics then you are a moron.
Again, under the original premise tax reform would already be occurring to pay for people’s basic needs…you know, the thing that UBI is supposed to partially cover.
In our current economy…not in one where people’s basic needs are already being met.
The theory of UBI generating more money than it cost relies on the fact that covering some people’s basic needs increases their productivity. In the economic theory we were talking about their needs would already be fully covered. Meaning there wouldn’t be an increase in productivity, meaning UBI would not generate more money than it cost.
In all fairness, what you are claiming is pretty idiotic.
Even in communist countries where people’s most basic needs are fully covered by the government, they don’t the receiver free checks from the government, in fact in most of them it’s illegal to be unemployed for long periods. Arguably productivity is even more important in planned and centralized economies, and a UBI with a socialized system would just motivate people not to work.
That’s pretty fucking stupid since people worked on stuff outside of subsistence farming well before money existed. You’re so wrapped up in how things are and how you think things should work you’re not seeing anything potential. In your bleak worldview humanity must enslave itself. Maybe if you had a perspective that was more focused on the happiness and well-being of humans you could use that oh-so-massive big brain of yours to figure out a way for people to have their needs met and have a functioning society, but your motivations are clearly set in a different direction.
Economics existed before capitalism… Macroeconomics does not solely consist of the evaluation of currency. You can do a modern economic evaluation of subsistence farming communities, or a historical macroeconomic evaluation of previous societies.
Macroeconomics studies large scale forces of the economy, like a population’s effect on productivity, labor policy, government type, taxation, or even how weather will affect food growth.
Lol, even in economies where people equally own the means of production, individual people still have to be productive…
You are just a lazy ass who wants to receive the benefits of a socially and economically equitable society without labouring for it.
I started this conversation by arguing we should have a system that already insured our needs were met… You just want your needs met and then extra money so you can be a lazy ass and not contribute anything to society.
UBI is a scam that billionaires put forward because they know cutting a check for 500 bucks every month is a hell of a lot cheaper alternative than providing food, education, housing, and healthcare.
Maybe learn a iota about the economy before you start gargling Andrew Yang’s ballsack…