What about Basic Income Guarantee?

[BayCityProgressive]

http://www.usbig.net/
I am completely in favor of a basic income for all. The Worker's Party of Brazil recently passed this and the Socialist Workers party of Spain and ANC of South Africa are also considering

[CaTeacher]

1. I think this is a great idea!

We should forward it to the Kerry campaign!

[BayCityProgressive]

2. I will be voting for Kerry

but are you kidding me? I dont think Kerry will be very progressive at all and I really doubt he would embrace BIG although I wish he would..I believe Kucinich supported a study on it...

[CaTeacher]

3. Yeah--I was a Kucinich supporter too.

No--I don't think that Kerry would run talking about this--but I have been led to believe that he may govern more liberally than he campaigns (just hoping).

So I think it is a good idea to keep pressing for our issues--and hoping (even if it does not seem realistic). After all, Kerry will have the power soon. Even if he does nothing, at least he will know that there ARE people interested in this kind of policy.

I NEVER give up hope!

[mermaid]

4. I Like It!!

I have always said...for YEARS...that, my ideal society says no money is required for BASIC SURVIVAL...and beyond that, if you have the brains, the talent, the drive, the perseverance to earn more, then the sky's the limit! But people should not be allowed to become inasnely weaalthy AT THE EXPENSE of others...by deliberately creating deprivations, as our current system does.

I have no problem with someone being or becoming filthy rich...so long as everyone's BASIC SURVIVAL NEEDS are met.

If we wanna claim to be the greatest country in the world, this is the least we can do for our citizens.

So, what ARE "basic survival needs?"

As I see it, the following fall under this category...

Food
Clothing
Shelter (this includes heat in winter or A/C in summer for those living in extreme climates)
Medical Care (both routine and emergency care - and includes dental care)
Education
Reliable Transportation (this can even be in the form of free rides on the bus!) But one must have reliable transportation to and from a place where they may then contribute back to society in the form of work.

Am I missing anything, folks? I don't think so. The above list ought to be considered as Basic Survival Necessities.

[CaTeacher]

5. Mermaid--

I wish you were running for office! I love you!

[mermaid]

6. Thanks

but the day I ever get elected, we will KNOW this country has really turned.

I'm a transsexual. No fucking way is a majority gonna support a "freak" or a "pervert" like me, are they?

Although it should be noted that I use the terms "freak" and "pervert" as the major insults that would be hurled at me. turth be known, I'm asexual, could care less for sex with ANYONE...male or female, and the last time I had it, Clinton was still in his first term...and I was drunk, anyway, so it don't count.

I can honestly say I have never willingly had sex in my life, and don't want it, either. So who's a "pervert?"

Nevertheless, this is how people like me are PERCEIVED...

[CaTeacher]

8. you have my vote!

but--yeah--Texas will be a tough sale!

Hey--don't let the bastards get you down. I PERCEIVE you as being very perceptive, smart, and cool!

[mermaid]

9. Geez, Now I Am Blushing..

Thank you very much.

I have long wanted to run for some public office...not in hopes of getting elected, but in hopes of getting some of these issues out there, to be discussed, and having a "more electable" (read: non-transsexual!!) candidate glom onto them!

[Pithlet]

7. That about covers it.

I don't think it's all that out of reach, if only people would stop listening to the greed inspired right wing talking points that the poor are just lazy or lacking character.

[mermaid]

10. I Do Not Think It Is Out Of Reach, Either

but it is soooo seductive for some to just believe the poor are lazy or lacking in character. Well, it is seductive for those who lack the strength to look within and find validation...those who must forever find someone lower than them to look down upon, so that they can feel better about themselves...that they are at least "superior" to someone.
God what a rotten way to live.
It is so much better to be able to look within and find validation.

[mvd]

56. Great post!

The U.S. is big enough to be able to do it.

I am also in favor of keeping necessities off-limits when it comes to creditors. No exceptions. And I know that lots of people owe money and it is their obligation to pay, but there should be income protection here. If it can be proven that someone loses income on purpose to cause protection, that could be punishable with jail time.

The rich do have the right to be rich, but they also should have to pay higher taxes if needed to keep up the guaranteed income.

[CaTeacher]

114. I agree

100%

[Nikia]

112. My friend told me why this would work

Having one's basic needs met would cut down on the amount of stress that many working people feel. There are people who would not have their basic needs if they missed a few days of work. This creates a class of stressed out, desperate people who literally feel like slaves to their workplace. This is not good for their health, raising children, or allowing them to do anything else with their lives (like perhaps getting higher education). It can also lead to crime. This is for people who are willing to work and do work. Many jobs pay a wage, where people without a private support net, face this situation. Employers can use this situation to their advantage to abuse their employees.
There are some people who are physically or mentally unable to handle full time employment. These people should be allowed basic survival too without having to be dependent upon anything other than what the government would provide any other American. Their care would be assured without having to worry about state budgets or programs or having someone else fill out paper work which may be too complicated for them. Those with mental or emotional disabilities will be less likely to turn to crime if they have their basic needs met.
Consumer spending would increase. The poor spend a large portion of their income on things like rent and food. Since these things would be provided, they would be free to buy things like cds and tennis shoes.
As far as the question if there would be many people who would choose not to work, we must remember that there are many people who know that their needs will always be provided for. Many upper and middle class families will provide for their adult children in hard times or even not so hard times. Although there may be a few ultra rich children who will choose to take advantage or adults who may marginally fall into the second category, most children of more fortunate families go to college and attempt a career even though they know that their parents won't let them starve. Imagine that, they work even though their survival doesn't depend on work. Why shouldn't the same logic apply to people who are struggling to make $6.00/hour who currently don't have people to rescue them.
Even if you think that adults are responsible for their economic fate, don't you think that it is good to think of their children? Shouldn't the children have a right to spend time with their parents and be guarenteed sufficient food and warmth? Wouldn't that help them do better in school and increase the chance that they would be productive citizens?
Despite popular belief, this would not have to be that expensive. The government doesn't really spend that much on the poor and much of it is the beauracacy of seeing whether or not a family qualifies for assistance. It isn't like this wouldn't benefit society in general either.

[Baltimoreboy]

11. Please elaborate

What exactly does this mean?

[mermaid]

12. What Does What Mean?

Read the thread...read the links. You seem a bright person.

[Baltimoreboy]

13. I read the thread

I wanted to know, under such a basic guarantee, do you have to work? Are you required to try and find a job? Or can you simply sit at home at watch Springer all day?

[mermaid]

14. Well, From What I Read...

It seems you COULD stay home and watch Springer all day...if ALL you wanted to achieve was raw survival, and nothing more.
Assuming you had managed to acquire a television before quiting working, since a television is NOT basic survival need.

I don't know of very many people that would be happy with achieving nothing but raw survival...i know I would not be...

but, it would be reassuring to know that, no matter what circumstance befell me, my RAW SURVIVAL would never be in question.

Does this help you understand?

Would YOU be happy achieving nothing more than RAW SURVIVAL? I doubt it. so most people would work. Because they want the extra goodies. And the only way to get them would be to WORK.

And some models proposed for a BIG, would require work, in the form of acceptable volunteer work, even. At least for the able-bodied. And the sound-of-mind. I assume for those physically or mentally incapable of working, exception to the work rule could and should be made.

[Baltimoreboy]

19. OK, I do understand

And maybe we've lived in different places, but I have known a fair number of people who would be satisfied to do nothing all day.

In my view, if you are able to work, requiring that seems entirely fair.

[Zidane]

44. See nothing wrong with not working

if you so choose - just be prepared not to have anything. Apparently under this system you would not be able to get ANY thing. No TV, phone service, clothes, whatever.

So if you choose not to you also choose not to have anything.

[Baltimoreboy]

54. Not in my world

If you are able to work, you should work.

[seabeyond]

15. my bad

wink

[MUSTANG_2004]

16. Current welfare program

Apart from the time limits of the current welfare program, what's the difference between this and the current package of welfare, disability, social security and unemployment programs?

[Zidane]

45. I believe

it eliminates the problem of 5.15/hr not being enough to live on, for one thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. If You Able Bodied You Should Work....

NT

[amazona]

22. there are not enough jobs

We already don't have enough jobs to go around, and in future with increased outsourcing/automation it seems to me there will be less and less jobs.

Even Nixon proposed a dole. Many other Westernized countries have a dole and, far from going broke, they seem to be doing better at least in terms of health and lifespans than we are.

It isn't like there are tons of jobs out there that no one is doing that these able-bodied people could be forced to do at slave wages or at any wage. When we give people no option but crime, we are going to be the victims of the crimes, not the wealthy behind their iron gates.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. If There's No Work Than I Am In Favor of Government Jobs

but the able bodied should work...

[mermaid]

33. I'm All In Favor Of Bringing Back The CCC n/t

n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Nixon Proposed The Earned Income Tax

designed for the working poor...


I don't know how one can make a moral defense of paying an able bodied person not to lack unless you can demonstrate there are no jobs available or they have dependents who need constant attention...

[Deja Q]

40. Then we need to encourage corporations to fortify the infrastructure and

not continue to whittle it away.

Bush* won't do shit.

Kerry may or may not. Probably won't, I'll have to see it then believe it. If Kerry doesn't, our economy WILL crumble. Remember, replacing $50/hr jobs with $7/hr jobs does hurt our economy when 67% of the GDP comes from our middle class buying plastic junk.

When the economy crumbles, people will not be happy. Let's hope it sinks into their skulls by then what these traitors are about.

[Darranar]

61. Should you be FORCED to work? n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. It's A Free Country....

If you don't want to work and have people to support you then you don't have to work but by what moral right can you compell others to pay you not to work...

[Darranar]

81. I don't support letting those not working starve...

because the result is a sort of threat: he or she MUST get a job, on penalty of death (or at the very least remendous misery). This allows companies to lower wages and worsen conditions; humans, choosing between having almost nothing to eat and having nothing to eat, will probably choose the former.

A guaranteed basic income forces corporations to compete with at least something, driving wages up and improving conditions.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

97. I wouldn't let people starve to death....

What if someone refuses to work and wants to spend their days at home, getting high, and having sex with their partner....


Should I be compelled to support his or her lifestyle with my tax dollars and by what moral rationale.....

[TX-RAT]

105. Not at all.

You have the freedom to live in poverty if you want to.

[jpgray]

71. Not if you are a single parent with four kids

With the state of our school system, denying those kids the advantage of even the most limited form parental attention is a problem that will end up costing society more than giving the single parent enough to only have to work one or two crappy part time jobs instead of three or four.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. I Qualified My Statement To Exclude Those With Dependents...

but the thought of an able bodied man or woman sitting home and collecting a check for not working is offensive...

[jpgray]

82. Okay--didn't see your qualification

But people who really need that money don't get it, and the reason is that the specter of 'lazy welfare queens' is held over our heads to push down our empathy and bring up our selfishness. We all have both traits, after all. In my view, the number of people a liberal welfare system would raise up would be worth any number of 'welfare queens' it created.

[EDT]

18. Todd Flanders: Daddy, what do taxes pay for?

Ned Flanders: Why, everything! Policeman, trees, sunshine, and let's not forget the folks who just don't feel like workin', God bless 'em!

[TexasSissy]

20. You've got to be kidding. Anyone is guaranteed a basic income if

they work.

I am in favor of some level of guaranteed health care, a liveable minimum wage, and some things like that. But an indefinite guaranteed income without having to work? No way.

[mermaid]

24. Really??

anyone is guaranteed a basic income if they work?

Do you mean under BIG...or under the current system?

Becuase how do you explain the working poor?

How do you explain ME???

Right now I work seven days a week, 365 days a year...no sick days, no holidays, no vactions, no NOTHING.

Can't figure out what I do?

I'm a lowly newspaper carrier, because it is all the work I could find. Forthunately for me, I finally got a REAL JOB...it starts Aug. 16.

But, for my work, which is work that isn't even fit for a convict...I get $825 a month. This is BEFORE taxes, not after. This is BEFORE the gas and wear and tear on my car...not after.

Let's see YOU make it, even as a single person like me...on $825 a month?

My rent alone is 425 a month.
Gas...to do this route, I have to buy a tank of gas on average, every 4 days. So say 7 tanks a month, at 20 bucks a fill...that's another 80. We're now up to 505 spent.
Car insurance (required by law...and my employer) 50 bucks a month.
Now we are at 555 a month.
Assume I can eat for 3 bucks a day...I can't really, but assume I can.
That's 90 bucks a month. Now we are at 645 a month. We haven't yet discussed clothing (including laudry of clothing) we haven't yet doscussed healthcare. we haven't yet discussed wear and tear on the car. We haven't yet discussed basic utilities. We haven't yet figured taxes into the mix.
Taxed at say, 10 percent (the lowest bracket) let's say 80 bucks a month. close enough. now we are at 725 a month
Basic utilities. my apartment charges me for gas (water heating) and water and wastewater. It's usually about 25 a month, and is paid at the same time as my rent is. so now we are at 750 a month.
figure another 40 for electricity. That is what it is in the CHEAPEST months. And I'm dead-center in Texas...an extreme climate, and sure as hell not in the cheapest months right now. but let's run with 40 bucks a month. Now we are at 790 a month.
let's figure 10 bucks a month for laundry. This counts soap, and one load of laundry a week (mixing whites and colors, even) as a machine costs $1.25, and a drier costs 75 cents. now we are at 800.

and we have figured on CHEAPEST electricity and taxes...we have figured on an unreasonably small amount of money to eat on. We have not figured on any new, or even used clothes, just laundering what I already have. I have 25 bucks left right now. And we haven't talked about wear and tear on the car, or healthcare. and I still don't really have enough to eat. can YOU live on three bucks worth of food a day?

And this is not because I am lazy, or don't want to work. This is because, until recently, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LOCATE WORK!!!

Now, again, how did you figure you were guaranteed a basic income if you DO work?

I sure hope you meant "You are guaranteed a basic income under BIG if you work" and not "You are guaranteed a basic income under our current system if you work."

[Baltimoreboy]

27. I delivered newspapers as a teen

But it's not designed to be a primary job. It's either a second job or a part-time position. Of course you can't make it on that alone. And yes, it sucks big time.

[mermaid]

32. True

But if that is ALL YOU CAN FIND...

Would you rather me do that, and subsidize me, under a BIG, for the basic survival I cannot meet...or would you prefer to drive me into crime.

Most crime is born of desperation.

Or would you rather I just said screw it, and let the government support me?

I'm doing what I can to make it. So far I have not gotten dime one in help from ANY government agency...or family, either.

Then again, I'm also white and have no children.

I hate to sound racist, but...the government don't help ya in Texas if you are white...

[Baltimoreboy]

34. I am not faulting your work ethic

Newspaper delivery is hard work -- in all kinds of weather. But it should also only be a couple hours a day and that makes it a part-time job.

That doesn't blame you in the least, but you can't expect a part-time job to pay full-time wages.

[mermaid]

35. Of Course Not...

But, DAMN...THIS, LITERALLY...IS ALL I CAN FIND!!!

THERE AREN'T FUCKING JOBS OUT THERE...IN SPITE OF THE SUPPOSED "RECOVERING ECONOMY!!"

What I am saying is I would support a BIG kicking in for someone in my sceanrio...who demonstrates a willingness to work what IS available...keeps looking for a more suitable job...and meanwhile does whatever IS available...to be maintained at a basic survival level until such time as they are able to locate better work.

a BIG would do this.

[thinkingwoman]

86. um, seriously

mcdonalds isn't hiring near you?

I have been a member of the working poor for decades...I am married with two children (now teens). I have known struggle and the impossibility of making ends meet on two full time minimum wage jobs.

And yet...I have never been out of work longer than two consecutive weeks. I have never accepted food stamps, welfare, or government health care. I qualified for all of those when my first husband walked out and didn't pay child support for more than a year, but I was too damned proud to accept a handout.

Instead, I worked two jobs, paid for needed childcare, leaned heavily on family and friends for assistance, and took whatever work I could find (rather than waiting for work I was qualified for).

Sorry, but when I hear people say there are no jobs I just don't believe it. If you are overqualified for available jobs I recommend that you dumb down your resume and try again.

[mermaid]

110. YOU Probably Are Not Also

transgender...and therefore face unfair (and in most cases, LEGAL) discrimination in employment.

[thinkingwoman]

113. Aha! You are correct.

That is a completely different situation entirely.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. Hmmmm

"I hate to sound racist, but, the government don't help ya in Texas if you are white..."


Governemt assistance programs are means tested not race tested....

[mermaid]

37. Bullshit!

Then how come you see Hispanics constantly getting welfare, food stamps, the works...and I get jack shit, even though I'M starving?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. Sounds Like An Urban Myth .....

If you need AFDC, Food Stamps or Medicaid the governemt doesn't care what color you are....

[mermaid]

43. then WHY Do I Get Turned Down for Help No Matter HOW Destitute I Am??

n/t

[haele]

46. You have no children and you aren't elderly or disabled...

And you're working, even though it's part-time. You aren't in the "unemployed and looking for work" catagory - or (illegaly) taking odd jobs "under the table" so that your employer isn't declaring you to the state and you can claim less income than you actually make.
But more than anything else, it's because you're single with no dependents and of a "working age" - and you have a declared job that pays over the "monthly minimum" set by some bureaucrat in your state capital probably around ten years ago.

That's why you don't get food stamps or any other assistance. Of course, unemployment is probably even less than what you make now - so it's not worth it to declare unemployment to get the assistance.

Take it from someone who's been there, done that on a short term basis before and has had to live off relatives and friends occasionally during job slumps. It sucks - and I'm glad you're getting a better job next month.

Haele

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TX-RAT]

108. Have you applied?

[Kanary]

28. I'm sorry that in today's DEM party, you are having to

explain and defend yourself about this very basic fact.

What you are living through is hell, and you are able to do it (and should be commended!) because you are young and without children.

I am appalled at the lack of caring and understanding from so=called DEMs, and see little hope that we will one day join the rest of the world in assuring basic living for our citizens. If other countries can do it, so can the US. We just choose not to. How very christian that makes us.

Because of this ignorance, we have a much higher crime rate in a country which is increasingly violent.

You have connected the dots, and I wish you lived in a country that recognized your intelligence and concern for others.

Kanary

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. One Can Support A Living Wage And Oppose Paying Able Bodied People Not To

Work....

[Kanary]

31. actually, I wasn't speaking to you

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. I Felt Bad For The Guy...

I am all for a real social safety net but able bodied people should work provided there are jobs and the person doesn't have dependents who need constant supervision....

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. I'll See Your Self Righteous Attitude And Raise You...

My dad had a ninth grade education and dropped out of school to help his family during the Depression... He lost the sight of his right eye from shrapnel and contacted malaria in WW 2....He died when I was fourteen years old and left my mom practically peniless....I worked my way through high school, college, and graduate school. I did post grad work in Government at Florida State University.


So obviously I know about comparative governments and economies...


You picked the WRONG person to diss....


Get a LIFE


bye now....

[Zidane]

47. Well then

this explains why you are so out of touch with someone making minimum wage - you're filthy rich. (by his standards)

Please spare me the poor SOB story. I get it all the time from republicans. Whenever you are talking about the dilema of people living on minimum wage they pull some poor SOB story (probably fake to begin with) about how they or someone close to them went from nothing to being well off.

What's the problem with that, though? Seems that they want to destroy the ability of people to go from nothing to being well off. Or they want to sit on their rich asses attacking people who are poor.

Yes - and there will be some people who will be stuck on minimum wage for most (or all) of their life. Don't fu**ing criticize them for it - as they are probably doing a hard/dirt/uncomfortable job while those who are better off are sitting in an AC office, in a chair all day, filling out papers or using a computer. And if it wasn't for them you wouldn't have anyone to do the dirty work for you.

[Kanary]

49. you got it, zidane!

:hi:

And, welcome to DU!

:toast:

It's like those vaunted CEOs are gonna go ahead and clean those toilets, eh?

I can't even get started on this...... I'm so sick of this rich country of ours treating people like shit, and calling ourselves "christian".

No wonder the rest of the world "hates us for our freedoms"

:eyes:

Kanary

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. Give Me Your E-Mail

and I will document everything I said... As Mao said "before you speak , investigate."


Show me where I knocked someone for being poor .....


You don't know shit about me so don't insinuate that you do...

[Zidane]

90. "Show me where I knocked someone for being poor"

I would, but I think your message was deleted. :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

98. That Wasn't My Message.... That Was The Person Attacking Me...

You really should hire a fact checker....


Post 41 is deleted which is a reponse to Post 38 which I wrote... Obviously I didn't repond to my own post....... Unless you want to attribute every deleted post to me which would be nonsensical your argument is kind of weak....



on edit- when you fall in a hole ,stop digging....



Kisses,


Brian

[DavidFL]

75. Yes. And it's a shame compassion is something that can't be taught.

Or learned from a book, but has to be learned through experience. And even then, I'm convinced that when those who hold the belief that the poor are poor because they're lazy themselves undergo a life-changing experience -- which requires a severe, downward modification in their lifestyle -- still wouldn't get it.

Coming to Florida after living my entire life in the North has really been an eye-opening experience for me because for a population that, for the most part, prides itself on its religiosity and "traditional values", they talk a good game about these things, but fall far short of actually practicing it. Jesus had a name for these people and they also forget that He made clear that belief was not enough to get one into Heaven, it requires acts, too. In any event, the only way I can describe it -- and this applies to other places besides Florida -- is the population has been brainwashed to believe in, and support, things which are only at their expense and they don't even realize they are just screwing themseveles over. Universal healthcare? Bah! That's what those commie socialists believe in, not red-blooded capitalist Americans. A living wage? Hell no! That drives business away and hurts the corporations which provide us with our (menial, minimum wage) jobs. Corporate tax breaks? We think they're great! Even though it only amounts to public assistance for non-living things. The only beneficiaries of this belief system are the wealthy and the good ol' boy club. Yet, here in Florida, most of those who are wealthy, or well off, have never worked an honest day in their life because their whole working lives are spent devising new ways to scam others out of their money through shady businesses, or working their connections to obtain bloated government contracts; these are the people I consider the true "welfare queens."

I might get flamed for this, but this is one of the reasons I HATE the DLC. They've brought people into the Democratic Party that, 30 years ago, would have been Republicans and then transformed these "values" into "mainstream" Democratic thinking.

Anyway, I do support the ideas of a guaranteed, livable income, universal healthcare -- which includes dental care, public schools and universal college because sometimes things happen to people that are simply out of their control and they and their families should not have to made to suffer for it by losing their home or having to go hungry and minimum wage jobs certainly aren't going to help support them.

[Toucano]

78. Why do you want to draw needless borderlines?

Filling out papers an using a computer can be hard and uncomfortable jobs as well. Just because someone uses a computer doesn't make them management.

The working class needs to unite, not divide because of pointless distinctions.

Everyone I know who works outside likes working outside. It's part of why they do what they do.

[Zidane]

91. I was specifically referring to

those with comfortable (well paying) office jobs talking down to those who don't have such a comfortable job. Nothing beyond that.

[Toucano]

77. Tell it DSB, tell it!

Thank you!

It never fails to amaze me how often the self-rightous, more-progressive-than-thou attitude comes up on DU. It's our equivalent of the right's "Why do you hate America?" and "You're not patriotic enough!"

Real progressive, ain't it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

79. This Is A Healthy Debate

I know of no nation , socialist or capitalist that pays healthy people who refuse to work... I also know that in the former Soviet Union parasitism was a crime and people that refused to work were imprisoned...


I don't think the proposition that the able bodied should work if jobs are available is either revolutionary or reactionary...


I am in favor of working to wards a living wage but one must beware of setting off an inflationary spiral..... If you double the salary of every worker and then doubled the cost of every good you are back where you started at....


The laws of economics are immutable......

[Toucano]

83. You're right, of course

although the "healthy" part is - get this -- debatable!

I'm not sure how healthy it is when some of the discussion's participants are faced with a different view and they don't bother to consider it, but rather pull out their golden badge and start issuing citations and criticisms about everyone's loyalty to the party and progressive values.

Too often these Progressive Values Police behave just like the Orwellian thought police they proclaim to fear and despise. They make the messenger the focus, rather than the message and inhibit honest, critical though and analysis.

In the name of defending progressive values, they behave just like right-wing nut jobs. Sometimes I wonder whose side they're really on. This attempt to cast doubt on their loyalty is merely for purposes of illustration, you understand. :)

Personally, I appreciate being reminded of the sacrifices and suffering that went before me. The men and women who struggled to bring me to this place have a lot to teach me. I honestly think we're in the mess we're in because we stopped listening to them and learning from their lives.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. I Think I Am A Progressive Thinker...

I just don't see how endorsing the proposition that the able bodied should be paid not to work establishes my progressive bona fides....

[Toucano]

85. Of course you are.

That's what makes so repulsive the efforts of some DUers earlier to suggest you aren't.

You called them on it, I congratulate you.

[TexasSissy]

107. You work...you get paid. Therefore, you have a basic income.

Did you interpret my sentence to mean that you were guaranteed a certain amount of a basic income if you worked? I didn't say that.

You work for pay. You get paid. Therefore, you get a basic income. As long as you work, you will get a basic income.

Don't whine to me about your job. I have a sister who was long term unemployed that I, a single working woman who doesn't make that much has been helping to support, who recently landed a job at a convenience store. She has an accounting degree, but that is the only job she could get, and she was lucky to get it. She can barely do it physically, since she's middleaged and in bad health. She gets paid minimum wage. She is not guaranteed 40 hours per week, but so far she has been getting that.

She makes about what you do, I guess. About $850/month. (Her car isn't reliable enough for a newspaper route.)

[TexasSissy]

109. So how much per hour are you earning? A newspaper route isn't 40 hrs/wk.

I would guess you earn more than the minimum wage per hour. Not that that's great. But it's better than my sister, who is working 40 hours per week for about $850/month (or less), which is minimum wage.

Let's hope Kerry gets elected, so we can get the min. wage increased. It'll still be inadequate, but better than now.

[sandnsea]

55. more horse puckey

That is just not true. How can you even say such a thing? $5.15 an hour is not even an income one person can live on, let along raise a child. Two parents working can't even raise a couple kids on minimum wage. They have to have govt assistance. You can't support govt assistance for low-income families and then get mad at those low-income families when they say they want to be paid so they can work and live without it.

[jsw_81]

21. There's no chance of anything like this becoming law in the U.S.

[CaTeacher]

26. WHY NOT?

I think there are plenty of people who NEED a policy like this.

Other more "civiized" soceties than ours actually take care of their people. Why can't we?

[Warren DeMontague]

58. Um, a little thing called "reality".

Half the country is still convinced that Al Gore and Bill Clinton, no enemies of business or capitalism, were and are "communists". You really think that something like this has a chance of becoming reality in a country where half the people get their news from Rush Limbaugh and Drudge? Come on. I realize the convention is the time for folks to air their dreams, but... look. I'd settle for a Single Payer Health Care system, personally, and maybe a decent (dare I say liveable?) minimum wage, but I'm not holding my breath for either.

[fujiyama]

23. Without a means test?

I was just reading it and that's what it said. I just don't understand the point of that.

I do think that everyone should be guaranteed health care, education, food, and shelter, and perhaps a job. I also support a safety net which supports those in times of need.

[Zidane]

48. After further consideration

I think a living wage mandate by law would probably be better. Though it might need to be a little more complex than that.

[Kanary]

50. Just keep your mind open, listen to those on the bottom rung

and read all you can about how other, more civilized, countries take care of their citizens.

We *CAN* do much better.

Kanary

[Zidane]

51. I agree

I think western Europe does a good job. We should probably adopt more of their ideas.

[CaTeacher]

52. yes.

Actually, I don't even understand why this is so contentious. How can people read these stories of people struggling for survival and not be moved?

The Democrats better get more compassion for people in need, or after this election I will be moving on to the Socialist party.

[Kanary]

59. "The DEMs Shall Not Be Moved..."

sigh.......

I've been really attacked by this issue here, and I really appreciate your comments....

Those of us on the bottom rung are really feeling the fear now, and the callousness of the party is not only adding to that fear, but causing a deep sense of hopelessness.

The fact that the "rank and file" can't even see these issues means they won't push the party, which means nuttin' gonna happen --except it getting worse.

I appreciate your thoughts, and will be following you "movin' on"....

Kanary

[Kanary]

53. I appreciate your willingness to consider it.

There are many poor people made miserable in this society who don't deserve the hardships they live with.

The DEM party *used* to be advocates of those on the bottom rung. That is no longer the case, and we're coming closer and closer to the days before Roosevelt instituted the New Deal. (In case you're not familiar with the history, the communists garnered great strength in those days, because the situation was so dire, and the party in power was just letting it happen. Some have guessed Roosevelt came up with the New Deal in order to mute the communists.)

Do we *really* need to repeat that?

We have a great history in this country of waiting for the HUGE CRISIS before we act. Could we please change that?

Back to those poor folk........ most of them don't know how much better other countries are treating their citizens. Let's show them that we consider them just as important as the people in other countries.

Or, let the CEOs clean the toilets.

Kanary

[Blue Wally]

66. How????

How does a "living wage" law differ from raising the minimum wage to an adequate level?? Instead of passing a new law, why not just peg the minimum wage at the proper level?

[Warren DeMontague]

60. Yes, it was proposals like this that helped McGovern win in '72

No offense, but, dream on.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. McGovern's Getting A Bad Rap Here...

McGovern was for a Earned Income Tax or a negative income tax which has been adopted by both parties.


Poor people with dependents get money back on their taxes ....

[Warren DeMontague]

65. I think McGovern was one of the best men to run for the presidency, ever..

Really, I do. Decent guy, war hero, lots of good ideas, smart as hell. Lost to a total criminal goon. But that doesn't change the fact that we need to acknowledge political reality in this country.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. I Agree 100%

I start from the premise that if you don't win, you can't govern....


I also believe and opinion polls will support me that America is a center-right nation and we must work within those constraints...

America is the most conservative industrialised democracy.....

[Blue Wally]

68. Lost big time..........

to the "total criminal goon" which goes to show what can happen if we move too far to the left.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. We Got Tarred As The Party Of Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion...

NT

[Warren DeMontague]

95. All of which have their place. n/t

[CaTeacher]

72. My parents fought heart and soul to try to get

McGovern elected---but just because he did not make it--that doesn't mean that no one with his beliefs can ever be electable.

I mean--come on--if the repugs thought that way--wouldn't they would have quit moving to the right--after all--Daddy Bush lost, Dole lost, (and don't forget that Shrub lost too). Doesn't that mean that RWers are unelectable? They should move to the center....

We are the ones who decided--oh--we lost an election--let's give up our core beliefs and try to sound like that other party. That sounds like a good idea!!!

Let's be pro-war! Let's support the death penalty! etc etc We will call ourselves "New Democrats"

:puke:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. What Core Beliefs Has Kerry Abandoned?

There are Democrats on both sides of the death penalty debate and there have always been Dems who were tough on nationl defense but I don't equate being tough on defense with being stupid...

[CaTeacher]

74. I didn't use the word "stupid" but I do

believe that most of these "wars" are racist--as is the death penalty.

Who shoulders the brunt of our racist policies? Not White males that is for sure.

To me, no Democrat should EVER support policies that are racist.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

76. I Am Ambivalent About The Death Penalty....

If it should be used at all it should be used for people who kill kids...


They are the lowest of the low.....


It shouldn't be used for garden variety killings...That's for sure.....


Not all wars are racist but I certainly wouldn't support one that was...

[Davis_X_Machina]

88. The original idea...

...had bipartisan support, was the result of a non-partisan blue ribbon Presidential commission, the 1969-1970 President's Commission on Income Maintenence Programs -- and the implementation -- never passed as legislation -- was engineered by Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

The fact that you can't even mention it anymore, even in Democratic circles, is a measure of the nation's rightward drift over the last thirty-five years.

[donco6]

69. Scenario:

Now that the Basic Income Guarantee has been established, the entire income of tens millions of people is now directly in the hands of the Federal Government. Yes, your friends, the feds. Yes, now that it's election year 2016, the politicians are all vying for the BIG vote with promises of increases for all. Whichever party guarantees the biggest increase WINS! Yay!

I don't see a good end to this.

[snippy]

87. This idea is somewhat similar to Milton Friedman's concept of a

negative income tax. The tax credit for earned income evolved from that concept. Reich wing republicans hate the EITC, but I think that it is good policy and would be good politics if the democrats could articulate it better.

[Mike Niendorff]

89. A simple question:

I hear a lot of people on this thread talking about "work" this, and "work" that.

I'd honestly like to hear a few of these people define *precisely* what they mean when they use that term "work". Do you mean "employment"? Do you mean "self-employment"? "Subsistance labor"? Is some relationship to the business community necessary in order for one's labor to be classified as "work"? Or do people have the right to provide for themselves independent of the business community?

This is a serious question, and I think it cuts very much to the heart of the debate at hand. Are we required to be dependent on the business community, or do we have some right to subsist independent of these organizations?

I eagerly await the replies from this thread's "work ethic" crowd.


MDN

(edit: typo)

[Mike Niendorff]

94. hello? anyone?

[Nevernose]

96. I see a little Marxist theory at work here.

Yes, I think that all people have the right to subsist independantly of business. This has historically been considered to mean land ownership so that anyone can have enough food to feed themselves and their family. Giving land to the peasants is pretty much the central tenant of communism. India's having a big problem with this right now, IIRC, because in order to join the WTO, they have to accept agricultural imports -- thereby throwing 600 million subsistence farmers out of work.

The problem with subsisting independantly in America is that we have advanced so far, are so used to luxuries, and are so ingrained with the capitalist mentality (capitalism isn't necessarily a bad thing, either, as far as I'm concerned), that life outside of business is inconceivable for most, not to mention untenable. How many people do you know who would be willing to live like sharecroppers?

Is this what you had in mind when you asked the question?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

99. Marx Never Envisioned A Person Sitting At Home And Collecting A Check For

Doing Nothing....


Though Marx was kind of sketchy on what society would like after the state whithered away he envisioned that work wouldn't be alienating or exploitative... He didn't envision that you wouldn't have to work....

[Mike Niendorff]

101. I'm simply asking people to define their terms.

There is a world of difference between a person who "will not work" vs. a person who "will not work for you".


MDN

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. There's All Kinds Of Work....

Work is the way we support ourselves and our dependents through our own efforts.....

I stand by the simple proposition that a person should make an attempt to support himself or herself in a manner that is right for him or her....


It goes without saying that a person should get a honest days pay for an honest days work...


I hate to be crude but after one hundred posts on this subject I'll use a crudity to illustrate my position...


If a person wants to stay home all day and jerk off in front of the computer should you or I be compelled to give part of our earnings in tax dollars to support him?

[Mike Niendorff]

103. to play devil's advocate:

Consider what you're saying here:

Under your hypothetical, if a person truly wants to be a lazy bum, then their only options are (1) starvation or (2) taxpayer support.

Now, ask yourself WHY those are the only options.

It isn't a trivial question.

Historically, those who wanted to opt out of a society (as in your example) had every right to do so. They could simply find a plot of unused land, build their own shelter and start providing for themselves (hunting, agriculture, trade, what have you). Humans survived like this for hundreds of thousands of years. And if your hypothetical "lazy man" has access to such an option, why would there be any need for you to support him? His subsistence needs are met, without any need for external support.

However, our current mode of social organization removes this option, placing a higher premium on the commerce in land titles than in meeting the basic necessities of all our citizens.

Thus, since the option for self-support is artificially removed, those who exist outside the system -- whether by choice, by chance or by misfortune -- will either starve or will be dependent on public (ie: taxpayer) support. This is, in fact, inherent in a system that artificially removes all other options for subsistence.

So my response to your hypothetical is that I reject any framework that artificially forces me to choose between two unacceptable options, while at the same time removing viable alternatives (guaranteed access to the means of subsistence, at minimum) from the field of discussion.


MDN

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. I Don't Have A Problem Helping Anybody Whether Through Individual Or

Collective Action....


Thanks to evolution the demands for self sufficiency have changed since the hunter gatherer days but I just don't think it's for good for anybody to do nothing....

[Mike Niendorff]

111. "collective action" is exactly what we have now.

And it's being used malignantly : to artificially restrict people's options for self-support, and to force them into dependence on a de facto ruling class.

The situation reminds me a lot of the counterarguments the abolitionists faced in the 19th Century. "My god, if we free those slaves, they'll all just sit around and do nothing! Where's the morality in that, I ask you? No, slavery is good for them. It keeps them from their otherwise slothful ways."

The mechanisms have changed since then, but the substance remains very much the same.


MDN

[Nevernose]

106. What about work that has no intrinsic value?

And thus fits nowhere on the economic scale? Work such as painting, writing, or even homemaking? The artisitc professions for centuries depended upon others' generosity for survival -- frequently a government's. There has been huge debate about this since the Romantic Age: does valuable only mean valuable in business?

Interesting historical footnote: capitalism was often seen in misogynistic terms. People consuming luxuries were classified as being feminine, and later this was applied to all consumers. Marx and others took this one step further and posited that capitalists, those providing goods to the consumer, were castrati, and all consumers were women.

[JanMichael]

92. Not in America. Too many people like the idea of Poverty.

It makes them feel superior.

[ArkDem]

93. Why not dream BIG. I think everyone should be wealthy.

[Triana]

102. I like the idea but it's too progressive...

...and this country hasn't evolved enough to grok it.