cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Advisor

The Advice of the Nerds

Take the time to actually read this. I can only imagine........ http://www.vice.com/read/something-for-everyone-0000546-v22n1
25 Replies
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: The Advice of the Nerds

 

That's interesting.

Hope BA doesn't see it though, he might self implode.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Math

Let see 320 million people.

 

About 75% are over 18. So 240 million payments of $30k.  With current cost of living, and the assumption that people wint have to work at all 30k at least.

 

240,000,000 * 30,000 = 7,200,000,000,000

 

thats $7.2 trillion. Is that math incorrect?

 

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Math


@Samthehumble wrote:

Let see 320 million people.

 

About 75% are over 18. So 240 million payments of $30k.  With current cost of living, and the assumption that people wint have to work at all 30k at least.

 

240,000,000 * 30,000 = 7,200,000,000,000

 

thats $7.2 trillion. Is that math incorrect?

 


Look at what we could save though. With that kind of money, indexed to inflation, there would be no need for education. We could fire every school teacher in the nation.

Highlighted
Advisor

Obvious that neither of you read it

It's not a proposal coming from liberals or progressives or leftists or what it is that 30 is calling anybosy who he doesn't agree with or understand today, but rather from effete libertarians who simply do't want to be bothered with the rest of us commoners.

 

Thanks for the kee juerk 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Math

We could fire a lot of teachers now, the dropout rate is somewhere near 30% according to President Obama and if you watch any of the shows where they interview people it's pretty obvious that a large number of people have no idea of history, math or government.

 

Maybe education should become a priviledge that you earn.  At least after 6th or 7th grade because that would give you what a large number of Americans evidently use, to get by.

 

They know how to read sufficiently so they can find aid and they know enough numbers to be able to buy food equal to the amount of their food stamps.

 

Those who are going to provide for them would then go on to higher education and not be in danger of being harmed or having classes disrupted by people that have not interest in being in school other than to hookup or sell drugs.

 

And many jobs such as postal delivery don't require an education beyond 3rd grade, after all read a number and match it to a house or apartment.

 

 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Obvious that neither of you read it

Oh, I read it, and its not a new proposal.   If the guy said he was a goose, would you say it was written by an effete goose?    Or should I put it this way, if the guy said he was a progressive and suggested the solution to poverty was to kill the poor, is that now a progressive idea?

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Obvious that neither of you read it


@bruce MN wrote:

It's not a proposal coming from liberals or progressives or leftists or what it is that 30 is calling anybosy who he doesn't agree with or understand today, but rather from effete libertarians who simply do't want to be bothered with the rest of us commoners.

 

Thanks for the kee juerk 


It's been kicked around here before Bruce. Only thing that changed is the numbers.

 

@r3020

Veteran Advisor
Posts: 13,554
Registered: ‎05-13-2010
 
 

The next great social program

 

Is this a great country or what. I'm sure this is what the signers of the Declaration of Independence had in mind.

 

snip-

A simple cash subsidy—$15,000 per year (which is about what the average retiree gets annually from Social Security) for every household, say—would give the poor and middle class a financial floor on which they could live, take care of their loved ones and maybe, says Jacobson, "think about what really needs doing, what they would like to do, what they have trained to do, as opposed to simply what someone might hire them to do."

It makes financial sense for the cash-strapped U.S. government. In 2012, the federal government spent $786 billion on Social Security and $94 billion on unemployment. Additionally, federal and state governments together spent $1 trillion on welfare of the food stamp variety. Adding those costs together, that's $1.88 trillion. This number shows no signs of falling—in fact, the number of people seeking social services each year is increasing, as is the rate of homelessness, and as the baby boomer generation ages, more and more will need the support of Social Security.

In switching over to a universal basic income, the books will not only stay balanced—they might even move into the black. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 115,227,000 households in the U.S. Split $1.88 trillion among all these households and each one gets $16,315.62. In other words, if you turned the welfare system into a $15,000 basic income payment, you’d end up saving over $150 billion (or $1,315.62 per American household).

The basic proposal can be tweaked, of course, so that the system makes a bit more sense. Households making over $100,000 per year probably get by just fine on their own. Cut them out of the equation, and you would end up with a $20,000 basic income check for the remaining households, while still netting the government some nice savings.

Despite the pleasingly round back-of-the-napkin math, replacing food stamps and other artifacts of America’s welfare system with no-strings-attached cash isn’t that easy. There’s the small matter, for example, of stitching together all of the patchwork social program providers—federal, state and local governments—and getting them to agree to all put in to one kitty. It’s also controversial. Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, a columnist for The Week, worries that if we gave everyone basic incomes to cover their necessities, it might encourage a mass exodus from the workforce as people no longer “need” to work to survive. And the fear that some kind of basic income might tank the economy by allowing “freeloaders” is hardly a new apprehension: Richard Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan, which proposed a modest basic income of $1,600 per family (plus $800 in food stamps) was opposed by conservatives in 1970 because it lacked work requirements; once those were added, the left, fearing the requirements were too onerous, opposed the bill. Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan never passed.

 

http://www.newsweek.com/how-fix-poverty-write-ever​y-family-basic-income-check-291583?piano_t=1

 

@Samthehumble

Veteran Contributor
Posts: 290
Registered: ‎11-03-2014
 
 

Re: The next great social program

 

Write it as a constitutional amendment where everyone gets 15k and thats it. No ssi, no medicaide, no Medicare, no food stamp , no section 8, no minimum wage, and all that stuff. No redistribution programs of any kind can ever again be considered. Im in. Hell make it 30k.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Obvious that neither of you read it

The most interesting thing about this particular tech bubble is that is highly dependent on consumer entertainment products. The first round did arguably enhance productivity, Facebook and Twitter probably detract from it.

 

But still not sure whether young "libertarian" oligarchs recognize that their fortunes require consumers with disposable income (after the credit runs out) or whether they just, as you suggest, find ideological appeal in a government that is so small that "you can drown it in a bathtub" but just big enough to maintain demand for their entertainment products.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Math

I'll give you an idea on how we or at least students could save a bundle. The normal course of study in this country is 17 years (K thru end of 4 yrs of college) and THEN if you want to be a lawyer, dr, dentist, etc, you go 4-5 or more, more. Right? You study English 14 to 17 of those years, you study history and math about the same. Also most other subjects maybe a little less. I met a young man in Germany who was 22 years old and had been a practicing Veterinarian for a year! After high school, he went directly to Vet school and graduated in 4 years which he said was normal for people who were qualified intellectually. He didn't skip any grade but he didn't have to study German for 13 years nor math, history and the rest. We could do the same. I mean how many years do you have to learn to conjugate verbs????