Pick between $15/hr min-wage or UBI

Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by wgabrie, Feb 22, 2021.

?

Would you pick raising the minimum wage or issuing UBI?

  1. $15 per hour minimum wage

    1 vote(s)
    3.8%
  2. Universal Basic Income (UBI)

    7 vote(s)
    26.9%
  3. Unsure

    3 vote(s)
    11.5%
  4. No, neither!

    15 vote(s)
    57.7%
  1. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You have to pick between raising the minimum wage to $15/hour or universal basic income. Which do you pick and why??
     
    roorooroo and DennisTate like this.
  2. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I pick neither, as they are both bad policy (socialism and/or fascism).

    Minimum wages are merely price controls, and price controls always lead to shortages, in this case a shortage of jobs.

    UBI is simply socialism, through and through. It is the theft of people's money and redistributing it to others. The SODC (Socialist Oligarchy of the District of Columbia) is completely broke; it cannot afford to pay a chunk of the population $X/month in UBI. Such a policy will only hasten the inevitable cash crash (or debt crash, if the SODC opts for that instead).
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  3. dharbert

    dharbert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2020
    Messages:
    2,262
    Likes Received:
    3,312
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Neither. With a minimum wage increase, the cost of goods and services simply rise along with it, and UBI is socialism in it's purest form and only serves to reward the lazy...
     
    gfm7175 likes this.
  4. GrayMan

    GrayMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    8,357
    Likes Received:
    3,512
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The 15dollar min wage is self defeating due to inflation. A UBI would not be as susceptible to inflation and resolves other issues including automation.

    Your question says one or the other but allows for other options? I thought this was an Ultimatum? In theory I support a UBI, to cover basic needs such as healthcare, water, food, but I don't trust that they wouldn't just elevate it to unreasonable proportions. It needs to be limited to the point where work is still necessary.

    The current system that encourages people to go on social help programs as apposed to working since they can make more on the programs than they can on a min wage job and if they took the job, they would lose assistance. The current system encourages them to not work.

    The other issue hitting us, is the full automation of industry. Anyone who pretends this is not an issue and thinks we can do things like we have always done is not paying attention. We will need a UBI eventually since labor will become less and less necessary, as computers and automation takes over. We will still need pay and a way to make a living.
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
    Mrs. b., roorooroo and Melb_muser like this.
  5. lemmiwinx

    lemmiwinx Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,428
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Pay your people what they're worth to you, duh. Capitalism can never go wrong. Why do think the My Pillow guy is a multi-millionaire and you're not?
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
    roorooroo likes this.
  6. Melb_muser

    Melb_muser Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2020
    Messages:
    10,342
    Likes Received:
    10,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, the world doesn't need X Billion people working to run. Far from it.

    Add to your points the existential challenges of not having to work. I wonder if a culture of reduced working hours plus supplement is the key
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  7. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's posts like this that are the reason I posted more than two options.

    Also this.
     
  8. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is a good post. :)

    Yes, this was supposed to be an Ultimatum, but I felt there needed to be more options to bring other points of view into the discussion.
     
  9. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    It should be based on the
    cost of living, here & there.

    NOT ONE SIZE FITS ALL!


    Moi :oldman:



    TaxCanada.jpg
    Make :flagcanada: Pay
    Its' Fair Share
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  10. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, the my pillow guy has ideas and acts on them, creating products that sell for money.

    I prefer to send my ideas to others and let them work on it, and profit from it. I prefer to stay in the shadows and remain obscured from the public limelight.
     
    gfm7175 likes this.
  11. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sometimes I feel that way about work (we don't all have to work), but then I have to remind myself that without the retail sector, what kind of world would we live in? We need many people working in low-paying jobs in the service sector.

    The high-paying jobs are the ones that will be taken over by technology.
     
    Melb_muser likes this.
  12. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, yes. Not increasing the minimum wage at the federal level, because they should be decided by the state and local levels of government, is a valid argument.
     
    DennisTate and gfm7175 like this.
  13. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Of Course

    ;)


    Variations in costs of housing
    or annual energy costs for examples.

    It might still be Federal but based on
    such real life costs indicators
    maybe at a County or District level & rate.


    Moi
    :oldman:




    Don't Further :flagcanada:ize
    :flagus:
     
    DennisTate likes this.
  14. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,705
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Selfish standpoint- either, or hell, both! Im invested in a mortgage, precious metals and storable food, so ruining the economy by devaluing the dollar by inflating the cost of living by giving everyone printed money will help me pay off my mortgage quicker and increase the purchasing power of my precious metals and other stored resources.

    Realistic standpoint- I voted neither, because I have empathy and even though I personally will thrive in the collapse, its going to be difficult for me to enjoy it given that most people are going to suffer it horrendously and I don't like people starving and freezing to death.

    If you really want to help the poor, we need to decrease their biggest financial burden- housing. Housing costs always rise to the maximum that people can afford because renters and homesellers are trying to maximize profit. So it doesnt matter how much you raise income or via what means, those at the bottom are going to lose the same portion of it to housing, or more accurately, have the same portion left over after paying that cost (and those who own the housing are going to be able to afford to own MORE of it, and drive the costs up further...). Housing is one (probably the only) area where I support authoritative regulations that decentivize the practice of collecting it as a means of storing wealth. And since housing requires land, land must also be decentivised as a means of storing wealth. The best way I can think of to do this would be to substantially (and quite gradually so as to not shock the economy) increase the annual taxes on nonprimary residential properties (while lowering or eliminating taxes on primary residential properties, so as to avoid transferring that burden to the cost of housing which we're trying to reduce). We should also start making some (no, not all) of the vast tracts of government owned land available for residential ownership to increase the supply of land, which will also aid in decreasing its cost.

    There should still be some protections for landlords, as there are many people who prefer to rent, and decentivising that market entirely would cause of host of other problems. The goal should be to decentivise the practice of hoarding residences, not necessarily the practice of investing in them, because if it becomes totally unprofitable, rentals will become scarce, which will drive their cost up. But as it is now, the answer to making more people more upwardly mobile is decreasing their cost of living, not increasing their gross income, and housing is by a wide margin the greatest portion of most people's cost of living.

    Something like this I think would be good (or, far better than what we have now): no taxes on primary residencial property, rental properties (occupied more than 50% of the year) are taxed at the current rate, any residencial property that is neither primary nor rented is taxed at a rate that scales up according to how many nonrented and nonprimary residencial properties one owns. Apartment buildings that are more than 50% occupied would be treated as a single residencial property.
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
    Melb_muser likes this.
  15. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A great argument about real estate property values.

    But, I think the government already provides affordable housing aid for the poor, low-income workers, at least they do in my area.
     
  16. Melb_muser

    Melb_muser Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2020
    Messages:
    10,342
    Likes Received:
    10,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Apparently, one of the contributing factors to the homelessness in San Francisco is exorbitant rent that has put people out on the streets. Lose your job and you're homeless
     
  17. Melb_muser

    Melb_muser Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2020
    Messages:
    10,342
    Likes Received:
    10,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I confess I haven't thought about it much. You could be right, however there are many manufacturing industries that could be automated. Hardly well-paying surely?
     
  18. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,705
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The problem with this method is that it decreases the incentive to become upwardly mobile. People who get their housing paid for by the govt will tend to try and keep that 'status quo' going. Its not uncommon that some people will avoid a slight elevation in their financial situation because it would threaten that status quo and result in a net loss. Given that the vast majority of improvements in individual financial situations are very gradual, this can lead to an institutional mindset (or at least that result after several occurances) of poverty and dependence. Reducing the cost of housing via my previously described method reduces the need for govt aid and thus reduces the level of institutional dependence.

    ...which is why its extremely unlikely to ever happen. Dependent people are a lot less prone to getting uppity about things like corruption, injustice and oppression, simply because they can't afford to risk losing that which they're dependent on. This system that generates dependency is a valuable social control mechanism for the corrupt and oppressive, they arent likely to relinquish it without a fight.
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
    Mrs. b. and dharbert like this.
  19. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,865
    Likes Received:
    10,275
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, I don’t HAVE do choose between two idiotic choices. Both are boat anchors on the economy.
     
    Collateral Damage and gfm7175 like this.
  20. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    BTW
    We Californians term those who exodus
    to Arizona or Texas - - California failures!



    :)
     
  21. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1,853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Ill take UBI. Raise the min wage later.
     
  22. Chrizton

    Chrizton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2020
    Messages:
    7,707
    Likes Received:
    3,784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I pick RESIST!!!!!
     
    gfm7175 likes this.
  23. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because he invented a product that people fell in love with and he started up his own business to make and sell that product (and other products, as his business has expanded) and you didn't do any of that, duh.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  24. Moriah

    Moriah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    7,646
    Likes Received:
    2,125
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    You left out an important choice. BOTH. We should do each of these bills as stand alone legislation. Both are very much needed.
     
  25. Maccabee

    Maccabee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    8,901
    Likes Received:
    1,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why not both?
     

Share This Page