I happened to see a review for this Democratic candidate's recent book and his ideas got me to thinking about the "train wreck" coming for the US due to rising technology and the growing number of citizens who can barely eke by. Sounds like his primary platform is universal basic income. One part of me thinks that is entitlement and the other part thinks it ain't gonna be pretty when all these folks run out of options to pay their bills. Thoughts?
If we do as he proposes, and pay everybody a thousand dollars a month funded by a value added tax, wouldn’t prices just rise proportionately to the new income?
I don't think prices would rise proportionately for those who really have nothing. Like you give a homeless person $1000 a month and many will be better off - people that really have nothing (some of them would qualify for disability now though but it may be too complex). You give people that go to bed hungry $1000 a month and there is no way food prices rise that much proportionately. So I really don't think proportionate rise would at all describe what would happen at the bottom, but it might kick in to a degree somewhat higher up than absolute poverty and want, and then depending on location, yea it's easy to raise rents in dense urban areas, but that might not have much to do with say rural poverty.
I think there might be issues funding it, it's not just another social program afterall, it's a brand new thing, but that's a separate argument from whether it would help the bottom if it could be funded. I think there is no way it wouldn't make an impact on extreme poverty in the U.S..
Trees don't grow on money
I just went and read about his plan and it answered a bunch of questions including the inflation one. Most welfare programs would go away. With 1k/month homeless people could move to a low cost of living and rent a apartment or room. This would enable them to become employed. It is a old idea and studies support it. It might revitalize rural areas as people wouldn’t have to follow jobs. The studies show that people work more not less.
I could see differences between the Bugatti and Bologna market segments much like SS has a redistributive effect.
I believe Andrew Yang could beat Donald Trump in 2020.
His emphasis is on policies that understand the changes that have transformed the US economy …
I like the sound of "Yang-Hickenlooper in 2020"
Update:
Yang is polling about 3% now. His campaign has over 90,000 individual donors ($1.7 million). Yang's stated goal is to have 200,000 donors by June, and to be among the top 10 Democrat contenders in polling by September
Yang is making use of the internet to reach out to voters, in preference to making alliances with party leaders. He puts out policy proposals and is prepared to give reasonable answers to questions from journalists or town hall participants. For example his proposed $1,000 per month guaranteed basic income, statehood for DC and PR, legalization of marijuana, etc.
Yang's black-and-white MATH caps are a visual mockery of candidate Trump's MAGA cap. I believe Yang is unafraid of verbal insults during the campaign. At the town hall I watched on television, Yang said his campaign people have been having fun guessing what derogatory name Donald Trump would insult Yang with.
From a published account of a Yang rally in Washington DC, I understand that his supporters are generationally diverse, ethnically diverse (with an over-representation of Asian-Americans), higher income, social progressives, working-class whites, a few teamsters.
It remains to be seen when (if ever?) Yang will be regarded as "serious". His latest email to supporters said, "we must become serious".
Also, when and how will Yang demonstrate an ability to turn out a large and vocal crowd? I don't mean 300 supporters at a rally. I mean a crowd such as Obama used to turn out.
Seriously, folks!
Hmmm. I really know nothing about Andrew Yang, so I googled him and came up with this article in USA Today about the candidates USA Today readers are most interested in, and he was at the top. (Take it with a grain of salt, though, because Marianne Williamson was third).
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...ut/3506638002/
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
Hickenlooper - the former Governor of Colorado - works for me. I have so much respect for this man.....and in an interesting way. I was once very much against marijuana and have since met people for whom it's been a true blessing......when we were in Denver staying with friends of mine who moved to Colorado back in 2016, I met a neighbor of theirs who was able to avoid having seizures due to the easy access to marijuana in Colorado, and I've since met two men who are ex military with PTSD for all their troubles who have medical marijuana cards in Arizona and are doing better - they are able to function to some degree due to their access to marijuana - medical only in Arizona - which Arizona law now allows for.Originally Posted by dado potato
Hickenlooper's administration presided over the time period when recreational access to mmj became legal in Colorado and I have so much respect for this man.........I'd love to see someone like him with access to the kind of power Trump has. It would be a calmer, quieter, possibly at least on the surface saner America. Rob
I foresee someone like the above mentioned Hickenlooper running, there being an issue eventually with their campaign bus and federally illegal drugs, across state lines.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote