RE: The lady who drove a Mercedes to pick up food vouchers.
July 19, 2014 at 8:05 pm
(This post was last modified: July 19, 2014 at 8:08 pm by Ryantology.)
(July 19, 2014 at 7:11 pm)Heywood Wrote:(July 19, 2014 at 6:38 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: And, I do absolutely agree with the idea of a guaranteed minimum income, because who deserves to have basic necessities is not a question we have the luxury of asking when we clearly have enough for everybody.
Just for the record I don't think the amount of the universal basic income should be predicated on what people need, but rather on what the government can afford. People might still need to work or starve/freeze. You can't tax too much lest you disincentive production.
People who are dead from a lack of basic necessities typically don't have a lot of incentive to work. People who are suffering because they have to choose between necessities are naturally less productive.
Paying extra taxes to ensure that the entire population has its basic needs met is good for everybody. It's not just about starving. People would commit less crime if they had less need. People would be more productive and innovative if they had educations that could get them professional jobs. More people with such jobs would lead to a higher standard of living for more people. More people with more money means a lot more opportunity for entrepreneurs who otherwise would not have the money to make the most of their skills. Healthcare costs would go down if people didn't have to pay for preventative care. People would be healthier if they could regularly afford better and more nutritious food. Why, even religion would benefit, as the devout could devote themselves full-time to spiritual matters without having to worry about not feeding their kids this month.
A guaranteed standard of living for every person is really a complete no-brainer in a country as wealthy as ours. Even those who would pay more in taxes would benefit in a huge number of ways that you can't financially quantify, and you could tax a billionaire 99% and still leave them living in a life of obscene luxury. We're so worried about the economy, yet we're taking the stupid approach and making sure that as few people as possible can contribute meaningfully to it.