Could this be the next Democrat proposal in the United States?

Switzerland’s ‘Basic Income’ Proposal – Could It Work In The US?


www.addictinginfo.org...

I assume you mean the Democratic Party and not Democracy...

Many in the USA do not like the idea of cheap healthcare or pensions or Medicaid or Medicare or even paying the bills for disabled vets so I do not believe the political climate is currently in a state where an idea like that would even be presented to congress.

Also, it would never pass in the current house of representatives.

So no, I do not think so at all (even if the idea has the blessings of Thomas Paine and Milton Friedman.)

Elton
I assume you mean the Democratic Party and not Democracy...

Many in the USA do not like the idea of cheap healthcare or pensions or Medicaid or Medicare or even paying the bills for disabled vets so I do not believe the political climate is currently in a state where an idea like that would even be presented to congress.

Also, it would never pass in the current house of representatives.

So no, I do not think so at all (even if the idea has the blessings of Thomas Paine and Milton Friedman.)

It isn't a matter of not liking benefit programs, but the reality of how to fund these programs and who will ultimately pay for them always seems to elude Democrats. They tend to pass things without understanding the impact or consequences of the bills they pass.

reply to post by Elton


Not sure what any of that has to do with what is being presented here, actually it would solve almost all of it. Except the fact that you said it would make it to congress or if by the grace of god it did. You again are right, it would not pass. But to say Americans wouldn't like it my friend is wrong at least IMO. And im american and I like it so guess not all americans would hate it

reply to post by Elton


Not sure what any of that has to do with what is being presented here, actually it would solve almost all of it. Except the fact that you said it would make it to congress or if by the grace of god it did. You again are right, it would not pass. But to say Americans wouldn't like it my friend is wrong at least IMO. And im american and I like it so guess not all americans would hate it

Sorry for double post

Well the illegal aliens would be the first to get it and probably the only ones. And suddenly they would have even more of age children
The majority of people who have lived their life in poverty would be overwhelmed and squander it for the first few years or fall victim to scammers.
The hood rats would continue being hoodrats and increase the hoodrat ways knowing the vulnerable now have money.
Pretty sure the cost of everything would go up and the 1% would have it all.

Never happen here. 300 million people, say 150 million "of age" x2000 a month = a lot of monet every month

the reality of how to fund these programs and who will ultimately pay for them always seems to elude Democrats.

The reality of how to fund the huge overblown military and who will ultimately pay for it never seems to elude government does it?

Money is frittered away on shiny new toys but when it comes to healthcare, pensions etc, no sir!

The original post has been edited since my original reply.

So my original reply can only be said to apply to the headline as the OP text has completely changed...

reply to post by Kram09


If you entirely cut military spending, the US would still go into the hole paying for welfare, particularly after enacting Obamacare. There's too many people to pay for and efforts to "thin the herd" of "undesirables," via abortion, and drug importation, has not worked.

Elton
... ... ... or even paying the bills for disabled vets

Why do you say that? Is there real evidence that its true?

Q33323
reply to post by Kram09

 

If you entirely cut military spending, the US would still go into the hole paying for welfare, particularly after enacting Obamacare. There's too many people to pay for and efforts to "thin the herd" of "undesirables," via abortion, and drug importation, has not worked.

edit on 28-12-2013 by Q33323 because: (no reason given)

your ignorance of real world economic machinations is staggering to the point of being laughable

reply to post by jimmyx


The irony is you drop into a thread with a one liner insult and don't even address the subject matter of the op.


The key is to purge lazy people, take care of the ones that cannot do for themselves and destroy the ones living off the system because they are lazy and just want to stay home and whine about how bad the gubment is. Im confident this would eliminate atleast 75 percent of entitlements and would enable the working force of america to keep more of the fruits of their own labors.

reply to post by LaElvis


This is all based on the idea that people would continue to work and perform the way they do now.

I think the people that were given unlimited unemployment benefits that just dropped out of the work force all together show what would happen if you gave people a way to live without working...path of least resistance mean anything .

And if you punished people for not working or not producing because they have a guaranty so no motivation to produce then you would be right back where you started.

You all can talk left and right political rhetoric all you want, this has nothing to do with politics' and everything to do with human nature.

What's the General Conspiracy here?

reply to post by Elton


All that was edited was spelling!!

Metallicus

It isn't a matter of not liking benefit programs, but the reality of how to fund these programs and who will ultimately pay for them always seems to elude Democrats. They tend to pass things without understanding the impact or consequences of the bills they pass.

Did you even read the article?

If you had, you would know that the funding side of the equation wasn't really that complicated at all and the adoption of this type of program might even save some money in the long run.

I really think that your "funding" argument is nothing more than a smoke screen the GOP hides behind in a futile attempt to conceal their real motives, which by the way, were also laid out pretty clearly in the article.

www.addictinginfo.org...

The Tea Party would hate giving people a basic income.
See, the problem is that there is a faction within the United States which is obsessed with people ‘not deserving’ some benefit. You hear that from this group regularly, talking about welfare queens, making children labor for school lunches, even throwing them in jail for being poor. They regularly want to turn programs designed to help the poor into some form of means-based system, where only those deemed worthy are given even the slightest help or assistance. From drug testing for benefits to voter suppression, it is the same underlying concept at work – someone that is deemed unworthy received something. So, voting while Democrat, unworthy. Welfare while a drug addict, unworthy. The list goes on and on. Conservatives simply have no cares about privacy or individual rights, they must know the most intimate of details, down to the persons bedroom habits. All so that they can sit as judge, deciding who is unworthy.

So of course, the idea of a low-overhead system which would guarantee every adult a basic income is absolutely alien to their way of thinking. Their focus on who is or is not worthy locks them into this struggle mindset, and limits their ability to function in a coherent society. They will continue to set up ever higher standards of worth until nobody can meet them. Of course these systems come with a very high price tag, making the programs incredibly inefficient. A waste of taxpayer money. But, so long as that one guy they deem unworthy does not get help, they are happy.

I'm American, I'm a Democrat and I happen to think this might just be a good thing if adopted. (but then, that's all it takes to trigger the Tea Party into filibustering anything like this to the end of time.)

All I know is that we can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.

reply to post by jimmyx


Then I'm glad I gave you an opportunity to chuckle


Also, I forgot to mention: paying people for doing absolutely nothing is a great way to buy votes for the Demoncrats. Thus, the aforementioned party will not have to expend as much resources for perpetrating mass-scale voter fraud across the U.S.

Think I am B.S.ing about fraud? Want proof? One word: Acorn. Who used to work for Acorn? B.H.O.

reply to post by ExoPatriotico


Ya it is true, the gov will do what ever they can to cut as much funding to diasabled vets, i don't have a source with numbers and what not just can go off personal experience. Marine Corps 6 years and many many family members that were injured in the line of duty and deal with the VA all the time about paying for things they are suppose to and don't. Its a sad truth that gets brushed under the rug

reply to post by Q33323


I doubt even democrats would like this idea, it is taking their money if it happens. And we shouldn't be bringing up the parties in this at all. This would be for the people from the people, we would need to force this to happen. Rep V Demo is false argument, they are both horrible parties with millions of blind voters and followers. If this came up i for damn sure wouldn't want the vote in their hands

reply to post by tinner07


Ok so your first statement that only illegal aliens will get it is completely false... Did you read the article? It says everyone rich and poor would receive it, so there goes that. Pumping out kids wouldn't get them more money since its only when you reach of age so the money goes to your name not your parents, its not like taxes. Which takes care of your hoodrat comment as well. And your excellent math equation almost stumped me but luckily i went to math class yesterday. Doesn't look like you read the article cause it addresses it, would replace welfare programs which im sure you don't like either. Its not a flawless idea, but it is a good one. Is what we got going on right now working?