[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / aus / baaa / caco / choroy / dempart / doomer / leftpol / miku ]

/leftpol/ - Left Politics

Winner of the 80rd Attention-Hungry Games
/otter/ - Otter For Your Soul

THE INFINITY CUP IS COMING BACK
May 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: 322fe6265c88466⋯.png (408.02 KB, 610x305, 2:1, basic.png)

 No.137959

why is this shit being sold to me by every neoliberal shill. Something seems shady about it. I doubt it will work. What are your opinions anons?

 No.137979

Jews want to create an even more compliant populace to fatten up and have them consume their goods. Due to capitalists being cheap they’re making the surplus population superfluous so now they’ll pay them just to live and consume until we hit Calhoun’s rat utopia levels of fun. Niggers will multiply with free money, as will all sorts of other filth


 No.137980

It would be the one time that automation would reduce the amount of people working for government and make things more efficient.

Obviously the big-government™ doesn't like it.


 No.137983

Whether it's good or bad is a matter of execution.

UBI that guarantees people food, housing, some spending money, etc without other costs to them is an improvement (but not going to happen).

UBI that gives you some cash but also raises regressive consumption taxes is bad (this is what silicon valley wants).


 No.137986

>>137983

This, basically. At best, it's an extension of other supports such as welfare, pensions, and minimum wage, coupled to other crucial reforms such as a job guarantee. At worst, it's the abolition of all other poverty mitigation, replacing them with a sub-poverty wage used as a subsidy to shady employers so they can stop paying people in actual money, and restore the truck system of indenture to create a permanent underclass of quasi-employed.


 No.137995

File: 954010a1a93d651⋯.png (894.4 KB, 860x1280, 43:64, 2fef90cc52bb2500.png)

Because they hate the poor. The appeal of UBI is that it will replace every other kind of social support, the poorest recipient will get the same amount as some rich fuck. This is why they like it, because they can say that they are helping without having to worry about social mobility.


 No.137996

>>137995

>give poor people FREE money

>hurr they hate the poor

Next thing you’ll tell me is that paying someone a wage for worker is “anti-worker” or that slavery is inhumane even though your master provides you with free food, clothes and a place to sleep


 No.137997

Elon Musk even admitted that the only advantage of his "hyperloop" compared to conventional metros, the advantage that outweighs all apparent disadvantages, is that he does not have to share the space with poor people.


 No.138001

>>137996

They don't want to give them free money. They want to also raise the effective price of consumption. It provides the illusion of free money or more purchasing power, when in reality the purchasing power drops. The effect is raising the level of exploitation at the consumer end, driving up profits and economic activity a bit more. But it's unsustainable because people are going to realize that they have to re-budget to account for the higher cost of living (taxes included) and we'll end up right back where we started (worse really) after maybe a few months. This is more or less emergency life support for capitalism, since we're already past the point where creating actual (new) social programs would force us to raise taxes on corporations to the point that it would drop the rate of profit low enough that the system fails. It's why you've got austerity being pushed so hard, because the bourgeoisie are at least self-aware enough to realize that if they can't boost profits soon (before the next crash is probably the deadline), the system will go down too hard to recover from.


 No.138005

File: 15b6493d06089af⋯.jpeg (77.1 KB, 830x781, 830:781, D2ZF4dYU0AEN-fj.jpeg)

>why is this shit being sold to me by every neoliberal shill

UBI is seen as a substitute for an increase in minimum wage or various welfare programs. While that alone doesn't make it bad, assuming it doesn't come with slashing wages, the intention is to shift away conflict from the point of exploitation and into the halls of government. The goal for neoliberal shills is to damage any worker's movement and solidify the state as the sole avenue of protest.


 No.138007

File: 6d8bd56f4071f1e⋯.jpg (59.48 KB, 500x1103, 500:1103, all power.jpg)

>>138005

>solidify the state as the sole avenue of protest

Oh, wow, great, not again.


 No.138008

The way Porky wants to structure UBI is a cut to existing social safety nets, rather than an increase. If you're disabled, you have to pay for healthcare out of pocket or, worse, buy insurance that doesn't actually cover anything and functions as a 10-20% tax on your 1k/month income. Same if you're old, or just poor in general. You'll probably be dead the moment you get sick with anything, and that's how Porky wants it. But if you're a NEET tucked away safely in your parents' basement, basic income is somewhat attractive so you can buy more useless shit and piss the money away.

I don't think UBI is terrible in principle, but it will be terrible in practice. Just see the perverse incentives in the existing social security system and how it is structured in a way that the super rich aren't paying for it, it's the middle-tier income earners forking over 13% of their wages/salary to pay for it. In a right world, the profits of the rich corporations would be taxed to pay for redistributive programs, and shareholders and CEOs would get shitall or better yet be expropriated entirely. Of course, in a right world, we wouldn't be bothering with money-like systems in the first place and we could have planned distribution in-kind for the goods people need or want, instead of working through a clumsy intermediary like money.

Another fun thing with neoliberal UBI is that it won't be universal, and it won't be basic (i.e., it won't be unconditionally given). Recipients would likely have to sacrifice certain freedoms and rights to receive the money, for example they would be barred from voting or even barred from driving and meaningful employment, or they would be forced to sterilize themselves (such restrictions are already de facto in place for certain disabled populations, even though the law explicitly disallows such things).


 No.138009

>>137959

I dunno but reminder that L Ron Muskrat is a normalfag trying to be a nerd because Maddison Ave has made it hip to be one to delay crapitalism's inevitable demise by strip-mining one of the last available frontiers that it needs to for its perpetual-expansion rapine economy.


 No.138097

>>137959

It's pretty simple: UBI is a half-assed way to adress poverty, but not income inequality. By giving everyone a free gib, worker's unions will stall, since no one will ever have an incentive to tackle the bourgeoisie. Everyone wants free shit, but we, socialists, don't. We don't want gibsmedats, '''we want to abolish capitalism and the bourgeoisie"; we want to be the ones in control of the economy. As long as UBI is in place, the bourgeoisie will remain in power.

Tl;Dr: UBI is a way to shut down worker's democracy. Lose the support of normes (which are overwhelmingly in favor of this); lose any chance of actually abolishing capitalism. It's just a shameless way to maintain economic hierarchy on behalf of progressivism.


 No.138098

>>138097

we want to abolish capitalism and the bourgeoisie


 No.138109

>>137959

>hat are your opinions anons?

the fact that UBI is starting to be considered as a legitimate policy proposal is proof that it is not revolutionary in any way but it does show that capitalism as it exists today is unsustainable and that the people in charge realize that UBI is needed for capitalism to stop itself from totally collapsing


 No.138111

File: 754aa6945276b11⋯.jpg (48.4 KB, 640x396, 160:99, storming1.jpg)

>>138109

>the fact that UBI is starting to be considered as a legitimate policy proposal is proof that it is not revolutionary in any way

Exactly. Meet us in The Washington Mall with your AK and your Makarov on May 1st Comrade. The fire rises. BJ45TR45FGRE45JY912


 No.138118

>>137986

Even in the worst case, UBI is the end of wage slavery. It means you can leave your shitty job at any time and survive. This gives workers unprecedented bargaining power and means to self-organize, and should be welcome by leftists, just as it will immediately be welcome by any minimally class-conscious prole.

What I actually worry about is the fact that it's pushed by people who can already see full automatization in the future. They're playing a long game, trying to preserve inequality until work is phased out, thus creating a permanent underclass reduced to surviving on handouts.


 No.138121

>>138118

>Even in the worst case, UBI is the end of wage slavery. It means you can leave your shitty job at any time and survive.

no it doesn't. If UBI is implemented that doesn't guarantee that the amount of money afforded by basic income will be enough for people to survive without working. And there's nothing stopping landlords from raising the rent and capitalists from increasing the price of goods once UBI is fully implemented.


 No.138125

>>138121

>no it doesn't. If UBI is implemented that doesn't guarantee that the amount of money afforded by basic income will be enough for people to survive without working. And there's nothing stopping landlords from raising the rent and capitalists from increasing the price of goods once UBI is fully implemented.

But if it's stated purpose is to provide those things then it provides grounds for the people to protest when it fails to achieve those things.

For all the naysayers: What exactly is your strategy, I'll drop my support for UBI this second when you tell me your brilliant fool proof strategy for revolution.


 No.138128

>>138125

>For all the naysayers: What exactly is your strategy, I'll drop my support for UBI this second when you tell me your brilliant fool proof strategy for revolution.

Until then I can't be sure you're not just LARPing boomers crying about

>muh taxes!

and

>I earned my UBI SSI!


 No.138129

>>138128 Me again

>>I earned my UBI SSI!

Frankly Yang should've called his UBI, SSI4ALL to hitch his cart to the Medicare4all bandwagon.


 No.138148

>>138121

>If UBI is implemented that doesn't guarantee

Yeah, you can never guarantee that something will work well, it doesn't mean we should not be doing things.

Just allow me to note that if revolution is implemented it also doesn't guarantee shit. Cases in point - USSR, PRoC, PRK…


 No.138151

How are you gonna combat inflation? I mean, the value still needs to be created in the real economy no matter how much money you redistribute.


 No.138152

>>138151

First explain how it would create inflation. Economies of scale decrease costs so increased consumption would only bring the costs of goods down unless we're talking about commodities that are a limited resource which would be out of the price range anyways of people living off of 12,000 dollars a year.


 No.138195

File: 250b008bc372090⋯.jpg (64.71 KB, 960x518, 480:259, yang vs bernie plan.jpg)


 No.138198

>>138195

wait wasn't the redpanel guy supposedly a lolbert?

Why would he be supporting UBI?


 No.138200

>>138198

nah they are a fascist


 No.138201

>>138195

What even is this supposed to mean?

>>138198

UBI or negative income tax started with the lolberts. It was Mises or one of the big ones who came up with it.


 No.138203

>>138198

it's fake like the Ben Garrison signature on all those A Wyatt Mann ones


 No.138204

>>138198

>wait wasn't the redpanel guy supposedly a lolbert?

UBI was first proposed by milton friedman remember.


 No.138205

>>138008

>Of course, in a right world, we wouldn't be bothering with money-like systems in the first place and we could have planned distribution in-kind for the goods people need or want, instead of working through a clumsy intermediary like money.

>we could have planned distribution in-kind for the goods people need or want

Who is we and who decides what we get?


 No.138265

>>137959

UBI is basically a government subsidy of all porkies. Rather than make porky pay his workers more, they make the government pay the workers who then give it to porky because they are still dependent on the capitalist system.


 No.138294

File: bd3fcb50a6bdfe9⋯.jpg (204.46 KB, 1194x730, 597:365, cybernetically_proven.jpg)

>>138205

The open-source cybernetic analysis of the use preference memeplex


 No.138298

>>138265

Did you just seriously claim that government enforcing higher wages is better than UBI?

First of all, the argument you make is beside the point, workers' money always eventually go to porky, regardless of how they acquired them. But more importantly, there's a crucial difference between the two, and it's in favor of the UBI. Porky can always deny you your wage by firing you, whereas UBI is out of his immediate control.


 No.138304

File: beea8f98c1a04c2⋯.gif (1.51 MB, 500x280, 25:14, beea8f98c1a04c226aa400087a….gif)

>>137996

slavery is inhumane even though your master provides you with free food, clothes and a place to sleep


 No.138307

>>138265

>>138298

>Did you just seriously claim that government enforcing higher wages is better than UBI?

>First of all, the argument you make is beside the point, workers' money always eventually go to porky, regardless of how they acquired them. But more importantly, there's a crucial difference between the two, and it's in favor of the UBI. Porky can always deny you your wage by firing you, whereas UBI is out of his immediate control.

Not only that, but there's a million ways to circumvent minimum wage jobs because of contract workers, tipped jobs etc. If you're a tipped employee the minimum wage your employer has to pay you is only: $2.13

https://www.dol.gov/whd/state/tipped.htm

All these people whining about minimum wage! minimum wage! minimum wage! probably never worked a minimum wage job in their life.

Also porky can just hire more illegals.


 No.138452

>>138304

>inhumane

Nice spook, fag


 No.138474

>>138304

This. The function of minimum wage isn't to ensure living on minimum wage is nice, it's to purge the job market of cheapskate porkies that rely on subsidization by externalities (debt, friends, family, working multiple jobs, high turnover, etc.) to keep their employees from dying of starvation, in lieu of at least paying a livable wage.


 No.138476

>>138474

>This. The function of minimum wage isn't to ensure living on minimum wage is nice, it's to purge the job market of cheapskate porkies that rely on subsidization by externalities (debt, friends, family, working multiple jobs, high turnover, etc.) to keep their employees from dying of starvation, in lieu of at least paying a livable wag

>The function of minimum wage isn't to ensure living on minimum wage is nice, it's to purge the job market of cheapskate porkies that rely on subsidization by externalities

How you gonna just ignore my post fam?

>>138307

Tips? What about tips fool?


 No.138485

>>138476

Yeah, there are a lot of weasely ways around it (the worst IMHO isn't tips, but agriculture, which can completely exempt employees from minimum wage, in addition to stripping away other rights such as overtime pay).

But keep in mind that, due to additional legislation at the state and local level, such horrendous loopholes don't exist in much of the country.


 No.138489

>>138485

>But keep in mind that, due to additional legislation at the state and local level, such horrendous loopholes don't exist in much of the country.

You're completely missing the point. The new trend in the economy isn't into waged and salaried positions, it's into contract workers and "gig economy" where the workers don't have to be payed in any kind of minimum based on time but only based on a payment per task completed.

>the worst IMHO isn't tips,

Yes tips are bad, specifically it completely contradicts what you are saying here:

> it's to purge the job market of cheapskate porkies that rely on subsidization by externalities

That's exactly what tips are. Pawning off the expense of the workers into a hidden cost for the customer.

So again the direction of new jobs are into payment per task jobs like Amazon delivery and scooter pickup etc. and the worst cheapskates jobs like Uber, Lyft, and Grubhub where it is both unwaged and also the payment is undervalued because the cost pawned off to the customer.

Tips are bad in so many other ways because they put the worker into a gambler like stress mindset where they are always in a state of suspense about their wage based on factors that are ever changing and completely beyond their control.

>it's to purge the job market of cheapskate porkies that rely on subsidization by externalities

I don't even know what you're basing this on to be honest.


 No.138490

>>137979

the best way to use that money is on the black market with no paper trail.


 No.138768

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES


 No.139208

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES


 No.139314

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES


 No.139627

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / aus / baaa / caco / choroy / dempart / doomer / leftpol / miku ]