Message from @GingaBomber
Discord ID: 472093169555603456
And well, I can go on, I have spent alot of time thinking. And I am generally very much against any idea of govt controll.
So stuff like charity vs welfare, govt vs private.
It's not government control.
Well, dependence on the govt then
It would be money given by the government but with no restrictions on it.
Okay.
okay where were we
It's still government control at the end of the day
The money comes from somewhere
And government is not a revenue generator
government revenue is taxpayer money
Yes.
Why should the taxpayer be expected to pay into an equity system?
It's not an equity system.
basic income,
The bottom is equity
It is literally redistribution of wealth, just on a small scale
Its equal opportunity. If the govt gets its revenue from something other than tax
It's not opportunity, it's outcome
So you're against welfare?
Im only against how its implemented now.
As a rule, yes
That said, i can sympathise with those that can't provide for their own due to debilitation,
Hence i'm okay with essential welfare
but like ginga said
Not as a means to buy votes
I think any safety net should be minimized, and dissolved if a better alternative emerges outside of government provided means
Okay, well it is my proposal that this would be a viable option for those that wish to leave welfare and re-enter the work force.
The system now is okay, its just too corrupt.
No drug testing on applicants.
that is the whole idea behind welfare, a safety net to help people get back on track
The issue is "good luck getting people to work if they're comfortable"
Drug testing is costly and ineffective.
And the definition of "actively searching for employment" is rather easy to spoof
Which is the issue, we have no idea to proove that they are spending welfare on what its meant for.
And dont forget the sugar industry push to stop the ban on being able to buy soft drinks with food stamps
There's a bigger issue with UBI: It'll create a class of people who depend heavily on state income.
They'll have literally nothing better to do but complain they need more. It'll be the G7 protests daily.
Okay, well I don't care if they're actively looking or not, so there's that.
There is alot of lobbying and politics in welfare as it is now.
When it should be an apolitical position
Plus, you'd have issues of what is a "sustainable income"
Why wouldn't you, if they're receiving money for it?
NYC is much, much more than upstate.
Ginga, theres lobbying in politics for ENTERTAINMENT 😛
I never said it would be sustainable at first.