Charles Murray had a UBI plan but in it UBI *replaced* all other welfare spending. While not excellent his argument was that it would be a net reduction in spending.

I’m awaiting the “Nancy epically owns Blumbpf 3000 by ripping up his speech;is this the end for Drubumbpf?” News articles

whether deregulation or increasing regulations, it should always be in the interest of small business first

I can’t wait to see Trump’s tweet about it

He’ll probably tweet on the ride back to the White House lmao

Or when he gets back to the WH for the post SOTU Shit

Welp I'm gonna go see whats new vees nsfw chat, later.

@SilverKestral the answer is furries

It's always furries

what we need is to scrap the current welfare system

Vore. Lots and lots of vore...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/medicare-for-all/undocumented-immigrant-health-care/

and if we have one AT ALL it needs to incentivize the right things

getting married. having a family. etc.

being employed.

Yang doesn't support what you claimed

things like this.

yea to yangs credit he did stand up against that

but my beef with yang is on gun control

Welfare in general is a shit idea, the state can't and shouldn't be a substitute parent for people

Yep furries and a debate about thighs.

i do think the gov can incentivize families to stay together @randomNPCno3

it just needs to be debated how to do so

traditional families are important to american society, so itd be ideal to incentivize more of that

Remove welfare, child support, and alimony. Done

I get iffy on government incentives, I think that the state should be reactionary. And stick to disincentives for things that have been proven to be an issue

Now people have to make smart choices when choosing a partner because govt isn't coming to bail them out

"don't do this" vs "you have to do this"

Government incentive just feels too much like social engineering to me. Aiming for an endgoal instead of just setting a framework to play within

idk. i think social engineering to some degree can be beneficial. its like people always hate propaganda... but in my opinion if the propaganda effectively spreads the ideology I agree with, then its good. So if the incentives actually led to more traditional families... then id be happy with it. the issue is putting in something and not observing if it works or not and then deciding to either scrap it or keep it based on its performance

to me its like. does it align with the cultural, ethnic, religious, and creedal identity of America?

and then effectively further that.

I just think it's inherently authoritarian, "if only people acted more like I want them to, things would be better" that's a thought that has to be accepted to think social engineering is okay. I'm in the "rules are rules, and if you're not breaking rules I don't care"

i mean the basis of our civilization is that we have order and laws that get people to behave the way we want them to lol

now gov is bounded in certain aspects

but yk...

theres still law and order.

really the only "law and order" you need is "don't hurt people and don't take their stuff" everything else will sort itself out.

and like i said im not down with every gov incentive. idk its case by case for me. what does it do? how does it work?

"as long as its not in my backyard guys!"

@UnScottable usually a tax break