Basic income as a human right

Post Reply New Topic

IMHO those opposed to taxes basically are opposed to government. I would not live in any such tax-free society as it likely would not be civil. a universal income would make for a more peaceful society with much less homelessness, while saving billions of dollars in present-day costs associated with incarceration and social services.

Viewers of Larken Rose and those in the know about Anonymous would disagree.

The fact is that a taxed society is NOT civil as it's based on PUNISHMENT of people for « fake crimes » that are « invented » just to force extortion on you. Welcome to POLICE-STATE USA where they care more about forcing you to pay stupid & ridiculous fees, even if you're struggling to transition out of homelessness whilst homelessly working a job, than they do about wishing you well on your way & bidding you good luck in becoming wealthy & getting yourself established.

Perhaps you would care to respond point-by-point to all of the points that are made in the following documentary to try & convince me that a tax-free society would be worse off than a heavily taxed society...

Taxes are not a punishment. They create a better society. Where do you expect roads, schools, libraries, and NASA to come from if not from taxes? Privatizing everything would only make things more expensive, which would hurt the very people you consider to be "victims" of taxes.



The Illuminati?

Did you even bother to listen to the documentary or are you just auto-responding a priori ?
The questions regarding roads & hospitals & schools were ALREADY ANSWERED within.

Furthermore, the income tax does NOT pay for a SINGLE PENNY of Social-Services, and this has been PROVEN via the Grace-Commission Report that was released during President-Reagan's terms in office. The fact that you've made the responses that you've made show that you CLEARLY did NOT even BOTHER to WATCH or LISTEN to the video AT ALL.

The vast MAJORITY of expenditures by governments ALWAYS go towards MILITARY (UNNECESSARILY I might add). The roads already have MORE than ENOUGH funds collected from FUEL-TAX when filling up tanks of vehicles & automobiles at gas-stations to keep them EASILY maintained & pristine & cleaned (this was ALSO true was BEFORE the average price per gallon shot up ABOVE 1$US/gallon to MORE THAN 3$US AVERAGE [and in some cases 4$US+/gallon] back during the ENRON-SCANDAL which was ALSO FUNDED by a LOT of TAX dollars).

Let's not forget about those CRIMINAL BANKER BAIL-OUTS whilst MILLIONS continue to be HOMELESS (and no it is NOT due to being « lazy » because a LOT of the « homeless » within America DO in fact HAVE jobs, like I did, despite having lived in my car before even THAT was taken away because of POLICE STATE USA).

Speaking of POLICE STATE USA we need to add more video-footage of POLICE STATE USA in action...

They aren't rewarded obscenely, they found an angle on sales and worked it. They earned that money even though it is excessive, but they earned it. I want to see everybody who earns money get to keep it and the government not say "Well, thats enough for you, but keep working though!" And the US isn't just big companies and everybody else having s**t. There are all levels of income in the US. People earn what they can earn. You don't have to have a certain amount of money to be happy, and just because somebody else makes more than you doesn't mean you are worth less as a person or that you will be less happy than them. Money isn't the be all and end all, it's just the thing you need to survive. That sounds funny, but it's true. We are one weeks paycheck away from going under and we are usually that way. However it's how things are and I don't spend my time hating on companies who make a lot or people who have tons of money or thinking about how unfair it is. I worry about myself and my life and family and how we can get by and how we might could be a little better off. That is basically all life is. Getting by, but enjoying the people you love while you are doing it.

If my husband made 50k a year we would still have money problems, just a different kind of money problems. It wouldn't be the light bill or getting a car that would be the problem it would be taxes and retirement investments and kids college and other things. The more money you make the higher your standard of living. That costs money. You are always trying to take care of everything unless you are one of the super rich people and there aren't many of those. Also, the more you have the more you could lose if you go under.

What is your reasoning for thinking that it's the right thing to do to tell someone how much money they can make? How do you plan on handling it? Would you take every profit they make over a certain amount? Whats to stop them from just shutting down for the rest of the year once they reached their cap? That would be the sensible thing to do because if you aren't getting any of the profit after a certain date you are only just paying for overhead with nothing coming in. It makes no business sense whatsoever.

Also, all these people who you think should have walmarts money are the ones who choose to go there to shop. It's not like we don't have a choice, we do. We choose to go there. Why not start the revolution by getting the proles to boycott walmart? If there are as many people in the US who want what you want as you seem to think there are, you shouldn't have a problem bringing walmart and the bourgiouse as well, to their knees where they seem to belong.

I'm not trying to be ugly with you, I'm just debating. I like you very much and respect you, and you know me and how I am so you know this is just my way of debating the topic. If something I say offends you, please, PLEASE tell me. I won't know otherwise and I certainly don't mean to. Promise that ok?

^^^
no worries OOM I just believe that if corporations were severely punished for hiding income from the IRS, and if we returned to eisenhauer-era levels of taxation upon the wealthy [50%] that 1] the moneybags crowd would still be plenty rich, and 2] we'd no longer have struggles over "guns versus butter."

Politicians are in CONTROL of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (make that TRILLIONS of dollars to reflect more up-to-date modern-day numbers) but NOT ONE PENNY of it was WEALTH that they EARNED...

As if we don't already have enough slackers as it is with our present welfare system.....
No thanks.

This reasoning only makes sense if you believe that capitalism actually rewards people for the work they do. A lot of people are trying the best they can and still need government assistance. There are people working two jobs who are still struggling. The vast majority musicians, writers, and artists are paid so little for their work that they are forced to work a second job.

Is life not a human right? I think it's despicable that our current system exploits the poor while doing nothing to actually help them. A basic income would finally fulfill the Constitution's promises of "life, liberty, and property".

I would wager the bulk of right wingers would indeed say that life [unless it's a fetus] is NOT a basic human right.

the Libertarian response is that : if YOU think you are entitled to ______, then you must also believe in using force to enslave someone to provide that for YOU.

Now you listen here. I do not think most people are lazy, and I'm far from lazy. So, you think because I don't have a job outside the home that I'm lazy? REALLY? I'm a housewife and I run my home and pay the bills and make the appointments and cook, clean, wash, iron, do all the housework, and take care of every f*****g thing that has to be done in this house except for going out for 8 hours to do work to bring home the money, which I manage and work damn hard to make sure everybody has everything they need and some of what they want on an extremely tight budget.

There is no work in this town. None. I have no vehicle. However, I'm not lazy. I'm also 51 years old and have raised 4 great kids and taught them well. I've also had jobs before when I lived in Birmingham and my kids were in school. I've been a cashier, I've owned a convenience store, I've also had quite a few other jobs that were a bit more complicated than that. I've been to college twice and quit twice, once to get married and move out of state, once when I was pregnant with my first child. I've been a writer, a private detective, a bounty hunter, a bartender, a pharmacy courier, unit clerk in NICU and tech in L&D and well baby and OB, a vet tech and gas passer, assistant at a funeral home, phlebotomist, paramed to conduct insurance physicals tests, personal assistant to a neonatologist, a waitress and I hung duct. I've done a hell of a lot more than you so don't you dare call me lazy. I work my butt off every day in my home for my family. I'm the one who makes sure everybody is taken care of. My staying home was a choice that we made when my husband and I discussed it. We had good, solid reasons and they are none of your business so I'm not going into them for you.

The people I'm talking about who would quit are in entirely different situations than you. I also know a whole lot more people than you seem to and have known many more as would be expected since I'm twice your age.

So, before you call me lazy, you need to stop and think about what it is I actually do. Now, if your mom doesn't do anything around the house and that is why you are judging what I do with my life, then you have made a critical error in logic there. If she's not lazy and does take care of you and her home and family then I'd suggest you stop and take a look at what all she does do because it's a whole lot harder than you think it is, and it's a whole lot more work.

Before you sit on your high bouncy horse and judge the world you need to learn a whole lot more about it. You can forget my offer on the other thread. You blew that.

Lazy is the last thing I am. The very, very last.

They are punished for hiding money. Offshore investments are not hidden and perfectly legal.

Here you're not talking about slackers. By slackers I mean those who won't make an honest effort to find work even in the best of economies.

That would tell me that the above arent exactly good career fields to be in.


We DO have the right to live, but not to have the means provided at taxpayer expense. Rights and entitlements are two different things.

Would it be allowed to save money from the basic income? I currently have SSI which provides me some money to live on...but its set up in such a way I'd be penalized for saving more than say 2,000 dollars I always have to have under that in my checking/savings. So yeah I can't really like start saving up on my SSI to try and build up a little money to get something started for me, or eventually just buy a house which doesn't serve me too well. In theory I like this idea of the universal basic income...but it would depend on how it actually plays out as well. I mean if the basic income is granted, there aren't any archaic limits on saving/saving to invest then it would be a good way to give everyone a fair shot to better themselves...and it wouldn't be so much risking 'everything' because if they took a risk, it backfired they'd still have the basic income to fall back on. It would prevent someone from ending up on the streets with no financial means to survive...not sure it would totally stop homelessness, but it might reduce chronic/long term homelessness or at least give some of those individuals a better quality of life.

Well what really costs taxpayers more in the end though...supporting social programs or something like a universal basic income. Or what it would cost them without all that...due to increased medical costs, higher crime rate due to more general desperation among the poor, weaker infrastructure, building even more prisons to house even more criminals as well as mentally ill without resources to defend themselves legally...all these kinds of issues in turn cost the tax-payer a lot more than simply having a system that supports its people, including its poor.