I think guaranteed income is a good idea. You want poor people to have enough money to eat well, to have a TV to sit in front of and stay out of trouble, and to own just enough property that he's tied down to it just like the rest of us.

Give everyone that amount of money, and watch the crime rate plummet like a rock.

(May 5, 2017 at 12:43 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I think guaranteed income is a good idea.  You want poor people to have enough money to eat well, to have a TV to sit in front of and stay out of trouble, and to own just enough property that he's tied down to it just like the rest of us.

Give everyone that amount of money, and watch the crime rate plummet like a rock.

I could not function without the internet, so I would take that over the television.

(May 5, 2017 at 12:07 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: What do you mean, that they functionally pay no taxes?  They pay in, but get it all back?  While they may have a year with a bad loss, I would be willing to bet that overall, they contributed to society quite abbot more than you. I would give up my salary, to have what my boss pays in taxes.

Now if there are loop holes, that allow people to sideskirt the spirit of the tax laws, there is nothing wrong with discussing or fixing that. However I don't agree at all, that just because one has money, that they should be paying higher, just because of that. .

For some reason, I remember something about the widow's offering in the Gospels.

It's possible that the internet and video games are partly responsible for the drop in US crime over the last 25 years. There's something to be said for people having something to occupy their time.

(May 5, 2017 at 5:25 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: It's possible that the internet and video games are partly responsible for the drop in US crime over the last 25 years. There's something to be said for people having something to occupy their time.

Did it replace or enhance masturbation?

(May 5, 2017 at 12:21 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Yep, blame the other guy. Another victim of society. (sigh)

What you call "blaming the other guy" is what is known as looking at reality and recognising it. You don't have to listen to me you know if reality offends you.

---

(May 5, 2017 at 5:25 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: It's possible that the internet and video games are partly responsible for the drop in US crime over the last 25 years. There's something to be said for people having something to occupy their time.

Taking the lead out of petrol helped a lot too.

(May 4, 2017 at 12:03 am)Chad32 Wrote: I don't really think it's a good idea for people to just receive hundreds or thousands of dollars by default. Or if we're talking about it being small amounts, it really shouldn't be hard to scrounge up some money from a menial task like .

Two big problems with your counter plan

1. If you mean they should do jobs for the money . That would undercut the people doing those jobs

2. You can't live on raking leaves, mowing a lawn, or washing a cars . And what's the point of said requirement.

---

Were already experimenting with this in Ontario

(May 5, 2017 at 6:31 pm)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(May 5, 2017 at 12:21 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Yep, blame the other guy. Another victim of society. (sigh)

What you call "blaming the other guy" is what is known as looking at reality and recognising it. You don't have to listen to me you know if reality offends you.

What I consider offensive is your self centered twisted over exaggerated reality, which is not reality. When you start making up numbers, get called on it, post actual numbers, then rationalize and justify your made up numbers as still correct, that does not comport with reality. But it's what I'd expect from a person who considers themselves a victim. 

And the big bad parasites of the world not paying their fair share. According to who, you or the laws in countries where they do business? Can you not hear yourself?

Did I just see a big oil victim comment?  How did that make it into the conversation?

(May 5, 2017 at 6:55 pm)Orochi Wrote: Were already experimenting with this in Ontario

Cool, this should be interesting. First Finland, now Canada.

(May 5, 2017 at 6:55 pm)Orochi Wrote:

(May 4, 2017 at 12:03 am)Chad32 Wrote: I don't really think it's a good idea for people to just receive hundreds or thousands of dollars by default. Or if we're talking about it being small amounts, it really shouldn't be hard to scrounge up some money from a menial task like .

Two big problems with your counter plan

1. If you mean they should do jobs for the money . That would undercut the people doing those jobs

2. You can't live on raking leaves, mowing a lawn, or washing a cars . And what's the point of said requirement.

---

Were already experimenting with this in Ontario

We have people who survive on mowing lawns, I employ one of them. The car wash down the street employs many, year round.