1. Prophecy
Here is who I predicted would institute basic income back in 2017:
Mainstream Republicans and Democrats are corrupt retards who care naught beyond more tax cuts for the oligarchs and gibsmedats for the ghettoes, respectively. So its likely that it will be some political outsider President who ends up instituting basic income. In practice, given their wealth and high IQ, this in turn probably means some Silicon Valley plutocrat.
So, those first two are basically Trump!2019 and Commissar Kamala, respectively.
Yang is not quite a plutocrat, so I’m not 100% sure he’ll win. And his tech background he’s more East Coast than Silicon Valley. But otherwise, that’s his bio to a tee.
2. The Alt Right has defected to #YangGang en masse.
I am not surprised to see this (except, perhaps, for the alacrity of the change) for reasons I wrote about it back in 2015:
Today, in Europe as in the US, the basis of the welfare state is the use of targeted programs to help low-income members of the population. It is also widely known that certain ethnic minorities are overrepresented, sometimes grossly overrepresented, as a share of the recipients. In net terms, one can also look at it as a transfer of resources from indigenous Whites towards Non-Asian Minorities. As the demographic sluicegates to the Third World get opened up, these trends can only accelerate.
Many Whites are resentful about this, even if it is not politically correct to talk too openly about it. There are formidable psychological barriers just to thinking about things in such explicit terms.
Then comes along the idea of Universal Basic Income, which is not only cool and progressive but also feeds on the majority’s repressed sense of Ethnic Genetic Interests.
No wonder that everybody is jumping aboard!
You can also listen to a 2017 podcast I did with Robert Stark (The Stark Truth) where iirc I made many of the same points.
Yang’s UBI only applies after deducting the value of existing social programs that one already benefits from. There will still be gibsmedats, but now everyone would be entitled to them!
3. Drumpf
This has been helped along by Trump deciding to adopt a POWERFUL program revolving around opposing socialism, LEGAL immigrants for factories, rants about abortion, and condemning Dems as the real anti-Semites.
Things that basically nobody apart from a few slobbering boomers even care about.
And this all comes after failing at everything else – on the Wall (zero miles built), on stemming illegal immigration, on protecting his lieutenants, on protecting his supporters from getting banned on social media. The only half-decent successes he’s had have been on trade.
Trump has even managed to lose the Neo-Nazis at The Daily Stormer to a Chinaman, a half-Samoan Hindu, and a strong Somali Muslim woman. Winning!
The vast majority of the “Alt Right” are bright enough to recognize that since the only choice they have is between Invade the World/Invite the World or Invite the World/Get $1,000, they’d rather opt for the latter.
4. Memes
Meanwhile, though the Alt Right might be spent as an independent political force, /pol/ remains unrivalled in its memetic power. In particular, as befits his cyberpunk visions, Yang has completely wrestled the vaporwave market away from Trump:
As we learned from 2016, you can’t win if you don’t control the memes of production.
Meanwhile, /r/The_Donald has purged everyone halfway interesting and dissenting, it’s gone from the powerful memetic force it was in 2016 to an online, Trumpist version of Komsomol. They are no longer cool. They are squares.
5. His message appeals to everyone who wants $1,000.
It’s also a very easy message to understand. Like, what could be simpler than this?
Yes, some besuited beigeocrats from the Economics Department of Podunk University will come on and argue that it’s unsustainable and will bankrupt the country. But they can’t prove any of that.
Nobody knows what UBI will do. Economics is a pseudoscience. There are no knockdown arguments either way. But you can’t argue against it without seeming uncool. That’s the only thing that matters.
— scientism (@mr_scientism) March 8, 2019
6. Yang appeals to Fishtown
Meanwhile, as I already noted, there is basically no SJWism in his platform above the bare minimum required to run as a Democratic candidate.
No mention of Black issues on either website – which hosts a more comprehensive policy platform than all the other candidates combined – or Twitter, with the exception of one page that actually focused on pay inequality between men and women.
Interestingly, he has Tweeted about White problems:
Deaths now outnumber births among white people in more than half the states in the country. Much of this is low birth rates and white men dying from substance abuse and suicide. Our life expectancy has declined for 2 years. We need to do much more. https://t.co/zFRAkFY7FU
— Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸 (@AndrewYang) June 22, 2018
He says there’ll be gun control, but says he’ll be “reasonable” about it. Which probably means he doesn’t take it any more seriously than Obama. Thought if not, it’s hardly the end of the world… while I like gun rights, I have argued that technological developments will soon make gun control near inevitable.
He says he is open to immigration. Ok, sure, but get real. You have to say that as a Democrat, when the Overton Window has moved to such an extent that many of Democrats are now openly demanding the abolition of ICE.
Like it or not, but that Wall isn’t getting built. Deportation squads going to send illegals back by the trainload. American Latinos are in the US to stay*. As Ron Unz has pointed out, in the long-term, Latino baiting is a losing strategy. They are not that violent or dysfunctional relative to Whites, so the disparity between the apocalyptic horror stories that anti-immigration activists claim and reality quickly becomes big enough that ordinary people just start to ignore them.
In this context, you can’t (realistically) ask for anything much more ambitious than this:
- Secure the southern border and drastically decrease the number of illegal entries into the US
- Provide a new tier of long-term permanent residency for anyone who has been here illegally for a substantial amount of time so that they can come out of the shadows and enter the formal economy and become full members of the community.
- This new tier would permit individuals to work and stay in the country, provided they pay their taxes and don’t get convicted of a felony.
- This tier would put them on a longer, eighteen-year path to citizenship (the same amount of time it takes those born in the US to get full citizenship rights), reflecting our desire to bring them into our country but also their decision to circumvent legal immigration channels.
- Invest heavily in an information campaign to inform immigrant communities of this new tier of residency, and deport any undocumented immigrant who doesn’t proactively enroll in the program
Yang is no radical by Democratic standards, which should play well with blue-collar normies who just want their $1,000. And he’ll be free to move even further to the center should he actually be nominated (or run as a third-party candidate), leaving Trump with his remaining core constituency of plutocrats and Israel Firsters.
Moreover, come to think of it, Universal Basic Income is a Wall.
When you know that your $1,000 depends on the productivity of the economy, then you sure wouldn’t want immigrants (legal or illegal) “in the largest numbers ever” for the (soon-to-be-automated) factories.
Though you would admittedly want many smart fractions/cognitive elites, including imported ones, to design and build all those robots that will get everyone their $1,000. Yang’s platform is consistent with that. He says that no foreign student should finish their degree without a US permanent residency. In this sense, he is a classic cognitive elitist. There are problems with cognitive elitism. Even so, it is still probably better to import cognitive elites than surly permanent underclasses.
7. “But he’s just a meme candidate who’ll get 0.6% of the vote”
PredictIt current has him around 10% chance of taking the Dem nomination.
Here are the searches for the top likeliest Dem nominees this past week:
- Commissar Kamala: meh
- Crazy Bernie: Solid, though existing cult + name recognition helps
#YangGang: Evidently *not* just a /pol/ meme- Creepy Joe: Temporarily inflated by his announcement, otherwise like Yang
- Beto Who?
- Pocahontas also in the doldrums
So he isn’t negligible at any rate.
Yang is going to do very well in the debates. He was on the US National Debate Team in 1992 that went to the World Championships in London.
Ideologically, he is going to squat in Biden’s position, effectively displacing him out of the race. But apart from his folksy charm, and lack of creepy vibes, he will also be offering $1,000 and no intervention.
The real competition will then be a threeway race between Bernie, Yang, and Kamala.
Bernie is too old and too white. He is four years older than in the last elections, when he was already one of the oldest candidates. And the country he is running in is less white. And Yang will siphon off some of his people. He will be left with the hard leftists like the Chapo Trap House demographic… and that’s pretty much it.
Commissar Kamala unites the SJWs and party establishment. I was sure she’d take the nomination. I still think she will. But Yang is going to make it difficult. If this was a white dude pushing UBI, things may have been problematic. But Yang is a Chinaman, so he should be able to siphon off many of Kamala’s minority supporters too.
Trump’s path to victory in 2020:
(1) No recession. (Leading indicators in China and Japan not looking good).
(2) Runs against Commissar Kamila (as opposed to Biden, Bernie, Beto, Yang, or probably even Warren) OR Yang/Gabbard runs as third party.
The really big unknown is whether Yang is interested in running as a third party candidate. (If he does, Kamala will get something like 30%, he’ll get 25%, and Trump will get 40%, winning the election.)
But he will still absolutely trounce Trump, if he gets the nomination. And I think there’s at least a real chance of that.
I will admit that I am sympathetic to Yang. I can’t help but like a politician who RT’s Quillette, has phone calls with Nick Bostrom, and quotes Peter Turchin. This is basically like catnip to me.
I also genuinely think he’ll be good for the US.
I think he’ll be bad for Russia, though if only to the extent that he seems to have standard (moderate) Democrat positions on it and would also repair relations with Europe.
On China, I don’t know. Depends on whether Chinese ethnocentrism or Taiwanese svidomism* win out. Initially, I thought the former was likelier, though I’ve since had second thoughts.
He has said very little on foreign policy in general, though an isolationist trend can just about be discerned. (In any case, both he, Bernie, and even Kamala are running on a largely anti-interventionist platform).
What he can be sure to take seriously (based on his familiarity with Bostrom’s work) is AI safety, which may turn out to be a rather central existential issue in the 21st century.
There is also a small and distinct (vs. negligible wrt everyone else) chance he will go full glorious autistic transhumanism and massively increase funding for stuff like radical life extension. That would be pretty cool.
So you know how in the Civilization strategy games that once the first country adopts Democracy, all the other countries start getting an unhappiness penalty for avoiding it?
I think it will be the same for UBI.
If UBI is a success in the US, other countries will come under overwhelming domestic pressure to adopt it as well.
People around the world will start asking why they don’t deserve $1,000 like Americans do. $1,000 will come to be seen as a basic human right like freedom, food, security, and fast Internet.
Yang’s UBI program would translate to annual payments equivalent to 20% of US GDP per capita – a poverty level existence, to be sure, but still sufficient for a fulfilling, no frills life somewhere deep in the boondocks, or in a shared house in one of its major cities (outside SF and NY, at any rate). This would translate to around 500-700 Euros in most EU countries. Ironically, the mere existence of UBI in the US may well do more for the cause of European immigration nationalism – via Europeans adopting UBI themselves – than the entirety of the Identitarian Right.
I think it would also play well in Russia. America’s existing “democracy promotion” efforts revolving around issues like Chechen LGBT rights, various low single digit approval freaks from Echo of Moscow, and the suffering of the Crimean people under the Russian boot have been total failures. But once UBI starts becoming actualized, Russians will start asking why assorted oligarchs who didn’t at least earn their own wealth, like Bezos, but actively looted it in the 1990s, should have all the money while they subside on $500 wages and $200 pensions. China is fast becoming one of the most automated places on the planet, and gains a couple of billionaires every week. Tolerated for now, but perhaps American UBI will accentuate the contradictions between that and its official Communism to a critical degree.
These are of course fanciful scenarios, and unlikely ones. Still, it would be the height of irony if non-interventionist UBI’ism ends up creating more political troubles for America’s geopolitical adversaries than all of its previous democracy promotion combined.
- Petty nationalism.
You yourself wrote that the alt-right is “dead”, so why should it matter? And it seems doubtful to me that it ever mattered, I’ve never seen any proof that it was really important for Trump winning in 2016. It comes across as mostly an ephemeral internet phenomenon whose real world significance seems very doubtful to me.
As for that Yang guy, he’s got to win the Democratic primaries (all your other points about memes etc. are irrelevant for that), will he really appeal to black women in the American South?
Because they are heavily intertwined with /pol/, and /pol/ controls the memes of production.
Joking aside, if that was sufficient to win elections, 2018 would have been a favorable midterm for republicans. I have serious doubts that the DNC and MSM won’t screw Yang over like they did with Sanders, and in the event that he does run as an independent he’ll probably run into the same conundrum that Perot did in the 90s
I don’t support weirdos who think the solution to abortion/infanticide is MAH CONTRACEPTIVES (provided by UBI, naturally), which is Yang’s “solution.” And this crap about a sacred “right to privacy” – mah woman’s bodies – is based on Griswold v. Connecticut, one of the most absurdly ham-fisted SCOTUS decisions ever.
So, possibly, my choice will be between a delusional incumbent Baby Boomer and this guy Yang, who’s basically just another left-libertarian.
Great.
Good thing I don’t vote for any of these people.
But I appreciate his lip service to us poor crackers, even though I believe it about as much as I believe Trump.
Not to pretend to be Rod Dreher (I’m not a big fan of him anyway), but the “Alt-Right” relics who are supporting Yang for this UBI for whites idea are just ignoring the fact that what needs to be done is the hard work of individual sacrifice to build alternative, local institutions for our posterity when this country breaks apart. But mah welfare is more important, I guess.
I need a drink.
Wasn’t there something on the other thread about incels being sent to the FEMA Gulag soon? There might also be a gamer genocide afoot. So who knows how long /pol/ will still be around.
They [Latinos] are not that violent or dysfunctional relative to Whites
Up to a point, Lord Copper. Of the world’s ten most violent cities, five are in Mexico, three are in Venezuela and two are in Brazil. See this report, published yesterday by The New Observer.
The memes are wrong.
Universal basic income, FUNDED BY A VALUE ADDED TAX, is a terrible idea.
It isn’t a case of steal from Amazon, give to Pepe.
It’s steal from lower middle class and working class White Americans via the WORST POSSIBLE REGRESSIVE TAX, give to immigrants.
It is social security 2.0 – the promise of free money becomes the excuse for introducing a RIDICULOUSLY REGRESSIVE TAX.
Then, later, when the system goes bankrupt, some clever Paul Ryan type comes along to cut the free-cash-money-dollar payments, BUT THEY KEEP THE REGRESSIVE TAX IN PLACE.
If you want to do something useful with your vote, vote for Tucker/Coulter/Kobach or whoever else is the anti-Trump protest vote in the Republican primaries, then vote for the Constitution Party candidate in the general election.
I’m all for dat bag, but how will Yang sell this to an electorate that sees illegal immigrants as de facto citizens? They also get dat bag too? And where does it end? Any slob that presents at the border gets 10 Benjamins? (But enough about the Irish)
I see UBI as Yang’s version of the Wall. Sounds great, but his opponents in Congress know it’s his entire platform so they’ll fight like hell to stop it.
1) he’s a banking mafia candidate like Macron hence the not quite Left platform
2) yang gang was clearly professionally astroturfed initially but it’s true l’autistes have jumped on the bandwagon en masse
3) the core of the alt-right was always l’autistes not the public faces – they never went away, just got subdued by Trump not sending the marines into Wall St. like he should have
4) l’autiste support for Yang is mostly in the hope his UBI is accelerationist and will speed up the collapse
5) it’s more anti-Trump than pro-Yang
6) there’s astroturf stuff mixed in with l’autiste stuff
7) the current economic problems are the result of low demand caused by the elite’s policy of cheap labor and UBI will inject artificial demand so in theory if it was instituted it would be anti-accelerationist and help the elites keep the economy going for a while by sedating people
all that said i have a lot of faith in l’autistes collective instincts so i think in some way or other Yang’s candidacy will set a cat among the pigeons in some way i can’t yet see.
maybe BAP’s take
“Why Yang on the other hand is good: brutal offer of $$$ for vote exposes the degradation of this democracy..”
#
The various ethnic groups in America have similar homicide rates to the average for their source region.
The exception is hispanics who have a much lower rate than Central America…
because of ICE.
Abolish ICE and the hispanic homicide rate goes up to the source regional average.
HBD.
Universal income? I think some sort of universal conscription. Get 90 percent of minimum wage and a bowl of rice a day…carry around Yangs little red book. If Yang worked for tips at a Chinese restaurant he probably didn’t get rich doing it…speaking English or not. You know what the locals in San Francisco say about tipping in China Town? So now…Yang…out of the goodness of his asian heart…decides that Americans should be endowed with free money right? I see water flowing uphill…or pigs might fly type thing.
https://twitter.com/andrewyangvfa/status/1102056397003542528?lang=en
I would expect Yang to support “red flag” laws as part of a gun control agenda.
I also expect the emergence of the NAU (North American Union) as the real background agenda with immigration reform talk becoming little more than pointless political whitewash.
i dunno about that – from a banking mafia point of view welfare is just a way of offloading part of their wages bill onto the taxpayers (and doubly profitable if it’s paid for by borrowing from the banks)
i’m hoping it’ll start an auction: Kamala offering 1100, Benrie 1200, Beta 1300 etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvdFc93dS6A
Makes a peculiar sense, and plenty of it. At least for a “little guy”.
That type, I guess, around 60 % of Americans belong to, at least.
Crazy times, for sure.
that’s why they’re supporting it
the memes are funny. and that’s about it. there’s absolutely, positively zero serious political thought going on here.
if people on the right continue with this beyond a few months humorous dalliance, then they are beginning to discredit themselves.
Illegals can’t get UBI for at least 18 years.
not a lot of thought maybe but on a gut level
1) terminal disillusionment with Trump
2) no faith in a political solution
pretty significant
Meh. Yang’s UBI scheme is just another crude form of socialism and is far less innovative than less sophisticated people think. That WNs are sympathetic to it is no surprise since their economics views have always been left-wing.
Now, show me a candidate who tackes tax complexity, which wastes 20% of all tax collected, AND enables the ultra-rich to pay no tax since the published ‘retail’ tax rate is something they never have to deal with (and they can even virtue-signal about wanting it to be higher), and then we will have a real pioneer who wants to fix what ails America.
The ultra-rich are far more in favor of a 37% tax rate with tons of loopholes than a 21% flat tax and a tax form that takes one minute to do. When someone figures out why this is, the finally understand the US wealth hierarchy.
I trust DC to deliver on that about as much as you would trust a chimera of Lenin and Yeltsin to improve Russia. No matter how good a candidate’s platform it is an inescapable fact that he probably will cave on major policy positions once in office and get consumed by Washington. While Yang does have a lot of good ideas, I said the same thing of Trump 4 years ago, and I’m not in a rush to get another hit of hopium.
There’s your problem right there, Karlin. Federal taxes have never been above 20% of GDP for more than a year. And who’s gonna pay?????
How you support pensions for all while simultaneously supporting Putin’s pension reform is beyond me.
Personally, I’m not a fan of craven calls for more entirely unearned gibsmedats.
UBI isn’t socialism; it’s just stupid Nordic welfare state crap. Which is worse.
Also, if it has a COLA (given a Democrat’s proposing it, it probably will), its bias towards nonwhites will be even worse than it already is.
UBI is a great idea and in a well run society would have very positive results, there is no economic downside. It promotes consumption, provides security, the overall cost is very low, it is also fair. The problem is that US is not setup for it: it is too big and it lacks social infrastructure.
For UBI you need a reliable and simple ID system, well-educated population (esp. the lower 50%), and a level of security that would prevent random abuse of people who regularly get $1k/month. US also makes it easy for any system to be gamed because it combines naivete, random enforcement, sloppy administration and multitudes of criminal gangs.
It is too bad, because UBI is an excellent idea. Smaller, better administered countries (mostly in Europe) are better positioned to implement UBI. A certain amount of bureaucratic intrusion is required. Plus a stable social infrastructure.
There is probably a way to implement an imperfect UBI in US, but I suspect the dysfunctional Washington would load it up with so much garbage that it would be just another welfare program. Reparations would be just the beginning, at the end Jeff Bezos would probably be collecting about half of it. Somehow it would just work out that way, the Congress works in mysterious ways, and yet the result is always the same.
Anatoly
I suppose you are enthusiastic about Chairman Yangs’ enthusiam for increasing the scale Asian Legal Immigrants to America…..This is race-replacement writ-large….Do you feel in your gut that America is too white as Chairman Yang does?
Wait until Pelosi and Hoyer get through with the UBI bill, that 18 years will be reduced to 18 minutes.
i think trying to persuade average IQ MAGA people to unironically become sleazy gibs grovelers is a bad idea – what if it works?
on the other hand pitching Yang to the Dem base…
that could be both productive and very entertaining.
Except that blacks are not fond of Asians, so he might lose the black vote. As I posted the other day, he might be pumped by the Jewish lobby as their latest inoffensive minority that will still support Israel. I’m not sure how well that is going to go over with the Muslim crowd once it becomes known.
without the $1000 for sure
but with the $1000?
Anatoly
The Han Gook Yang is an enthusiast for increasing the scale of the H-1B….L1B Visa Program….The Chinese Legal Immigrant Scab Labor…..
Has Andrew Yang ever debated any of the thousands of Native Born White American Victims of the H1B…L1B Visa Programs? I’d like to see just how good a debater Yang is….perhaps Ron Unz can bring Yang over to Unz Review for a debate on the H1B…L1B Visa Programs….
Do you remember the news story from Canada a few years back about the 19 year Native Born White Canadian Teenage Male who had his head sliced off by a Legal Immigrant Han Gook from China on a Grey Hound bus…..
Yang? Not ambitious, not daring enough. We should want more.
Intelligent alien races could travel through interstellar space unseen by firing LASERS into orbiting black hole pairs to create high-speed ‘halo drive’ propulsion system
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6815485/Alien-races-travel-space-unseen-firing-LASERS-orbiting-black-hole-pairs.html
I can only assume Karlin is quite patriotic now, for his real country.
Therefore, there is some humour and distance from America, allowing him to laugh to himself that the most low-IQ, gullible subsection of American peasants, have been trolled to support a liberal social democratic racially Chinese leftwing candidate, of bourgeois origin.
Wasn’t this Obama election 2012?
Already was entertaining
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
reminded me i hadn’t looked at his site for a while
http://peterturchin.com/cliodynamica/the-yellow-vest-rebellion/
i think Beta was meant to be that.
quite
You are right about a VAT.
While I’m dreaming, I’d be intrigued instead by a UBI funded by:
a HEAVY wealth tax on the top one percent high-net-worth people (so the super-rich pay);
and a federal sales tax (so all the people pay who now are off the books, including many millions of illegal aliens getting paid in cash and paying no Fed income tax, Medicare / social security tax, while burdening our schools and hospitals with their children, contributing nothing towards legit functions like border security, national defense, pollution control, courts, etc.)
a HEAVY tax on remittances abroad, yet another sound idea from candidate Trump that disappeared down the memory hole.
Repeal the income tax entirely.
Hit the illegal aliens and the super rich HARD, lessen the burden on almost all the rest of us: US Citizens in the broad middle, who have been tax donkeys too long for people who shouldn’t even be here (illegal aliens) and people who take advantage of us while mocking us and aggregating absurd property through useless, counterproductive, or destructive activity like Hollywood perverts and “financiers” / bankers).
Much smaller, but to be thrown into the revenue mix ASAP: repeal fed prohibition of marijuana and levy a national excise tax on that.
i see much laughter in my future
Well Washington DC, was already funding such crazy researches – from crazy John McCain’s office even:
https://twitter.com/TTSAcademy/status/1088216416321323008
He probably wanted to bomb other planets.
The one thing black women like more than banal politicians and speakers who tell them they’re great, is $1k. He might just get some black women.
Yang’s problem will be the Eternal White Woman. White women will not vote for an Asian male, especially one who is highly logical. White women crave the “cool” guy, and sadly, despite being well adapted for the modern environment, Yang is not perceived as cool.
In practice it’d be nearly impossible for get UBI passed. Hundreds of thousands of useless federal workers would need to be fired from remunerative positions to free up 15-20% of GDP, it’s practically the entire federal budget.
UBI and Yang himself are about the only interesting thing about this would be boring election cycle. I think he will suck up an obscene amount of attention just like Trump did.
In an election that would have been extremely divided, who could have seen Alt-Right types, Bernie Bros, and Blacks come together to vote for UBI?
Richard Spencer’s analysis on Yang was pretty spot on. Jews ruthlessly vote for whoever is in their best interest without worrying about their identity, why shouldn’t white people?
I too believe that Yang would mop the floor with Trump, but I think Gabbard also stands a chance. If Yang wins the primary, I think he will take Gabbard as a running mate.
The ultra-rich are in favor of untaxing capital gains, and taxing labor. The ultra-rich are in favor of untaxing corporate gains, and taxing labor.
All of history is about a creditor class (plutocracy) trying to keep its gains by hook or crook.
Hudson writes about this in his latest book, “and forgive them their debts.”
Debts grow at an exponential rate, while the real economy has a S curve.
The $1000 will be injected into the base of the population where it will go on to pay down debts, returning ill gotten gains back to the original wealth source (the people and earth’s bounty).
It is actually good economics, and is neither socialism or finance capitalism. It is social credit.
Yang has some interesting and sensible proposals, such as you outlined (in 6.) on immigrants. His ambition is clearly well supplemented with an interest in ideas and I look forward to seeing him in the debates against the more conventional politicians.
A characteristic of capitalist economics is that as greater efficiencies through innovation/automation reduce labor demand in some core industry (such as food production) economic activity expands out into more discretionary industry (such as dining), but maybe there is some reason at this time for the concern of underemployment due to AI, taking into consideration deteriorating conditions of social environment (Murray’s Fishtown in Coming Apart). But people do need work in order to have self-respect, and to be respected and not resented by those around them, and in order to not fall into self-destructive habits. An alternative policy to consider, in the event of a harmfully low labor participation rate, would be to raise the minimum wage and subsidize wages of all low-wage jobs.
If this UBI shit begins to stick, other DNC candidates will not hesitate to pick it up. They are all mindless copycats.
Meanwhile, this idiot just lost all his support from Trump voters by claiming that in 20 years, whites will shoot up Asians the way they shot up the Jews at the synagogue, because of China’s rise and being seen as #1 competitor.
Like all his fellow libtards, Yang is still clueless/in denial about why people hate the Jews – the history, the domination of all banking, Hollywood, media, academia, the law, dirty money in politics, deep state, SV, silencing of all critics etc. Unless Asians take over control of all these institutions(and the Jews won’t let them), and start screaming anti-Sinoism anytime anyone criticizes China, this will not happen. Meanwhile, this POS sellout wants to staple a green card to every foreign grad’s diploma, regardless of what they major in or their GPA, so more American graduates can join the unemployment line.
Yang is trying to scaremonger his co-ethnics into voting for him, which is really dumb because East Asians make up no more than 1% of all voters, he’ll lose the 62% white votes because of that 1%. What an idiot. Just as well anyway, his immigration policy is atrocious. Another idiot who wants more H1b visas and green cards for Indians.
why not 1500 a month?
what stops another candidate from upstaging yang and saying i’ll give you 1500 a month instead. 500 more than that guy. then the next guy is like, no, i’ll give the people 2000 a month.
see where this goes?
you guys haven’t thought this out very well.
it’s worse than just co-opting another politician’s platform for campaign purposes. here, there’s actually a mathematical value, that they can go back and forth on.
that’s just one among the many, MANY other very non-serious, nonsense issues with this yang stuff.
as soon as bernie adopts 1500 a month UBI, are all you yang gang idiots going to drop the yang gang? should just call you the derp gang right now and get it over with.
From an accelerationist POV a competition on who can implement the highest UBI would probably be a good thing.
I think you meant “no faith in a political solution with Trump or any major figure currently in the Republican Party.”
There is always a political solution, but it comes the hard way and requires a little luck.
I don’t think Yang will get the nomination but he’ll definitely make a splash. To me his rise demonstrates less the power of /pol/ than the power of Joe Rogan (of all the bloody people…) I only started hearing about Yang after he appeared on Rogan’s podcast.
But you can see the power of that platform: you have a host who will give you unlimited time and freedom to explain yourself, and will generally not argue with or otherwise attempt to get one over on you. And then your appearance is broken down into multiple bite-sized ten-minute videos, each of which has the potential to go viral in its own right.
If I were the campaign manager for a floundering Dem candidate with a good, millennial-friendly personality I would be pushing for them to do Rogan. Corey Booker should for sure make an appearance; Tulsi Gabbard should ask for a recurring monthly spot.
I totally disagree.
I just heard Yangs talk to that Asian group and I was shocked to hear a politician talk so frankly about the things you might only see discussed in the alternative news space.
His points:
The idea that America will become more tolerant as we become more diverse is a myth.
Historically, that never happens. Instead you often see a lot of violence.
This transition will likely be very ugly. (He is talking to an Asian group, so he brings up that Asians could be targetted).
Shortly after Yangs talk was exposed, that New Zealand shooter came out which proves his point.
One way to help bring people together and reduce tribalism would be UBI.
This is a pretty red pilled conversation that wouldn’t have worked 10 years ago. But now I think it will resonate with people.
This video covers this topic pretty well.
https://youtu.be/EiQZNQSdcZk
The video clip is devastating:
https://twitter.com/Hail__To_You/status/1106392668555350018
I appreciated Yang’s own “naming the White man” in a tweet a few weeks ago (Blormpf-kushner never has, not once, while praising all other groups). I think that tweet may have launched #YangGang as a movement, at least its ex-MAGA-troll wing. I appreciate as well the ongoing troll operation for what it is — a mix of irony and lots of other things, with some genuine UBI ideological supporters.
But that video reinforces my initial skepticism-opposition to Yang, which is this:
He is [1] (obviously) not White but self-consciously East Asian/Chinese. Despite Taiwanese parents, he seems to identify as either ‘Chinese’ or ‘Asian’ from what I can tell, [2] he is a racialist in his own right, and [3] he is an elitist. Combining the three (East Asian racialist and elitist), his aim appears to be to pacify the ethnocultural core and legacy-majority (White Christians), so that [1] his own race is secure in North America (sounds familiar!) and [2] more “elite” immigrants are brought in, to help create a new, elite, post-White, experimental state, long since unmoored from any attachment to the (an[y]) organic nation but in which East Asians will be a distinctly powerful minority.
This is similar to the m.o. of the Overseas Chinese everywhere they have ever gone with the main difference that they would help create this new state outright, top-down. The rest of us are not needed, especially the problematic founding stock (“townies,” on a global scale).
The placated masses in Yang World get to guzzle down their ((($1,000))) every four weeks. No wrenches in the machine from them. Maybe a PRC-Communist Party-approved industrialist can be brought in to produce highly addictive drink on a huge scale. Call it Slurm. Such a drink would put the mind at ease, away from all the struggling and strifing that problematic lower classes are prone to. Drink one Slurm every few hours to feel good, forever. Subject to an 80% discount for all who pay in Yangbux. Then wait for the next YangBux deposit.
Yang is a stupid goof.
He says that he is afraid that whites are going to start killing Chinese.
He’s out of his mind.
I don’t think memes had anything to do with Trump’s election either. It was the Midwest that tipped it and they voted for Trump because of economics. But they are learning that the jobs are not coming back. If Yang can convince people to accept UBI without losing their self-respect he might have a chance.
Trump had to do two things, and two things only, to secure his position and ensure re election in 2020.
Keep the Zionist lobby happy.
He has more than adequately achieved both.
This is why he will be presented with an unelectable, widely disliked “opponent” he can easily beat in 2020, just like George W Bush and Barack Hussein Obama were. However, you’re all perfectly welcome to fantasise whatever you wish to.
UBI is just proof that democracy dies when the citizens discover that they can vote to give themselves money. Of course, what the voters want is irrelevant, especially in old “managed” democracies like the US, who have complex systems to keep the power in the hands of the elite while providing an illusion of democracy.
I think the cost of living variance within the USA is much higher than in most European countries. So UBI is in a way less “universal” in the USA than it would be in Europe.
GOP did manage to defend their majority in the senate.
Because folks with their hands out for “free” money are really deeply concerned with things like “the productivity of the economy”, and are really extra super good at making sound long-term decisions based on such concerns. How could it go wrong?!
“Trump has even managed to lose the Neo-Nazis at The Daily Stormer to a Chinaman, a half-Samoan Hindu, and a strong Somali Muslim woman. Winning!” Well, that suggests the characterization of Neo-Nazis might be all wrong. After all, the real “NAZIS” most important ally was an Asian country, Japan and Muslims and Hindus both fought in the German armed force3s to liberate their countries from Tories, Laborites, Republicans and Democrats, England and America, where “gook” and “nigger” were not uncommon epithets. These epithets were not used by Germans, a European country with almost no minorities, with Jews perhaps being the largest and making up about 1% of the population or less.
Here is Germany’s Josef Goebbels hosting the famous Japanese violinist Nejiko Suwa. German soldiers also pictured with the “gook”, as Americans referred to Japanese.
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/arts/music/nejiko-suwa-and-joseph-goebbelss-gift.html
First, a thousand dollars a month is not a universal basic income because you can’t live on it. Basic income has to supply basic living expenses.
Second, this is clearly an idea whose time has come. Western (European and European diaspora) cities have been economically unproductive since c.a. AD 1960, thanks to new forms of communications and transportation (of both goods and people). Production has been transferred to the countryside or to Asia. Western cities have been subsidized since c.a. AD 1970, have received enough income to preserve their population base because of the political power of the cities, not because of their economic importance. In short, the Western cities are economically parasitic, much as was the manufacturing sector of the USSR, and are diverting capital streams to present consumption.
From the above standpoint, a universal basic income is just another subsidy for city populations (the majority of the population), mixed with bribes to the countryside.
Its time has come because the political power of the cities has declined to such a degree that future city funding is in some doubt. Right now, city populations are maintained only by immigration of people who are not from the European Diaspora and a substantial fraction of whom cannot perform any useful economic function. This immigrant stream is favored because its purpose is to maintain city population (hence political power). Immigrants who can be productive tend to flee the cities, and thus do not maintain city population. However, this strategy has produced a population that cannot tolerate a European Diaspora industrial society, and wants to end it (AOC, the new Green Platform, the proposal to eliminate the Electoral College being examples of this). These proposals actually diminish the political power of cities by inciting resistance from the European Diaspora.
Accordingly, a thousand a month bribe to the rural population is now thought to be necessary to supplement the political power of the cities. That is, the 1k/month basic income is timely because only the offer of a bribe to the countryside (which has been impoverished to support the cities) has any chance of getting enough rural support to get additional money for city areas.
Or, more briefly yet, the cities see that they are a losing control.
Counterinsurgency
Same old same old? Or same old same old +$1000. Choose wisely. Pro tip: $1000 will buy a lot of whisky.
If $1000 UBI is a good idea, why not vote for the candidate promising $2000 UBI? Or $10,000? Why is one inflationary and unsustainable, but the other is prudent and inevitable?
No doubt Catholics could fill every pew, every Sunday, if they offered free hookers and cocaine.
Integrity matters.
I can’t wait for the YouTube bodycam videos of the GamerPol Irgun Forces going on FN-FAL powered supremacist rampages against normie congregations.
But on fiat money it’s completely vapid.
It’s the same as “we will pay your pension, guaranteed” when the hole is 220+ trillion fiat money dollars deep.
venezuelusa soon
I’m neither Alt Right nor Republican. I’m Deplorable. I’m a Nationalist like Trump except I mean it. I’m white but I’m not a White Nationalist. I’m not woke. I just think White Nationalism is Utopian. Like Wakanda. A lot of Deplorables are like me. Poor. We might vote for $1k in the general election over Trump’s Neocon bull shit. But we will not affect the Democrats nomination process. The Democrat’s nominee will be decided by the DNC and enforced by the Super Delegates. Early indications suggest the chosen one may be Ms. Kamala. Just watch the Corporate Media. They will like who the DNC likes.
YingYang is an interesting candidate. He doesn’t have to apologize for being white like Biden and Bernie. Neither does he appear to be a threat to the white race. Where exactly does a Chinaman fit in Identity Politics? He calls for UBI as a technocrat, not a Socialist. I think UBI is stupid. But not nearly as stupid as the GND. The Democratic establishment will love Yang’s regressive VAT as much as they hate soak the rich. Remember, they ARE rich.
Reason suggests that Yang could be the Nominee. But hate has the momentum and is the safer bet.
Off topic: It occurs to me that Trump could increase his chances by taking Sarah Palin as his running mate. I especially like the optics. And it would give the left an aneurysm. Would Sarah answer the call? What say you.
Links from the Yang meme thumbnails in the article are not working, all leading to a ‘nothing found’ error message
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the Dem Party Elite will never let that happen.
Yes, that’s the point of accelerationism.
Heighten the contradictions.
I wonder what Trump’s attitude towards Israel would be, absent of organized Jewry’s constant pressure on everyone to bow to their wishes, including mimicing total conformity to their narrrative. I think Trump deserves a lot of credit for paving the way for altering the discourse and opening it up to those that don’t necessarily conform to “American values”, the expression Latino immigrants and other minorities often lecture “real” Americans (the founding stock, European Americans) about. He may have “failed” in implementing his promises, but could be seen as a great president anyway, for paving the way for others.
I think the unrelenting attacks on him affected his decsions greatly. I presonally think he bombed Assad’s Syria twice to placate the Jewish media. It’s disgusting and perhaps cowardly, but all the others would have willing levelled Syria on day one of their presidency without any problem at all.
I wonder what the talking heads will say if Yang doesn’t kill more Arabs when the media calls for it. Will they call Yang an “anti-semite”? After many decades that slur may no longer be acceptable. Will the warmongers at AIPAC invite the Chinese Yang to speak to their group? Could he be the first to decline their “invitation”, more like an offer one can’t refuse? What a wonderful thought. It is interesting and wonferful that there are Asians that see the decline of whites as bad for the world.
Reminds me of H.L.Mencken’s quip that elections are advanced auctions of stolen goods.
18 minutes? The way we’re going, illegals will get UBI long before American-born citizens.
People who read Unz should know more than others, that is definitely not a crazy idea.
Yang’s point is that multiculturalism is dangerous, especially as automation disenfranchises so many people economically. And especially as we reach a tipping point where white people become a minority in America.
The future will be brutal as tribalism takes hold, and we better start thinking about getting ahead of this problem through UBI by empowering more of these people who feel powerless.
The timing of this video coming out could not be better, because literally the same night the New Zealand shooting happened which proves his point.
To address a few frequently raised issues:
$12,000 * ~200 million US adults = $2.4 trillion [US GDP ~$20 trillion in 2017], so should be ~10% of US GDP if Yang manages to implement it in his first term.
However, note that it will also produce massive cost savings elsewhere, and the value of many existing welfare programs such as housing benefits will be subtracted from UBI. Yang also advocates lower military spending. Given the dubious benefits of US interventionist adventures, not just to its recipients but to Americans themselves, that doesn’t seem like a bad idea*.
So real costs will be closer to ~5% of GDP.
US government spending is currently at ~38% of its GDP. Introducing UBI will take it to… the level of Germany and the Netherlands (~43%), and almost certainly below the level of the Euro area as a whole (~47%). Big deal.
Obviously this becomes decreasingly realistic as you much above $1,000.
I think you can subsist on $1,000 if you live frugally and either in a very cheap area, or share it with many other people in some sort of community house arrangement. (E.g. this is very common in Berkeley, which has a lot of lazy/creative/ingenious/poor people).
But to live with your creature comforts you would still need to work.
While I don’t deny that I prioritize Russians’ welfare over Americans’, which I have been in favor of since 2014.
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/548288373819863040
Note that my earliest (positive) articles & comments on UBI date from 2015:
Quoted in this article.
Incidentally, I have recognized the possibility of UBI going horribly wrong and becoming SJW-themed social credit for almost as long as I have supported it.
https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/833638871464284160
I don’t think it will happen, at least to that dystopian extent, but it’s not impossible.
Still, UBI is an inevitability. At some point of automation-immiseration, capitalism will no longer have the consumers to sustain its own production. Why not take the plunge now (or at least start discussing it intensively – something that Yang has already accomplished) instead of 20 years later when its forced on us anyway.
First, I think Tulsi Gabbard should certainly be mentioned among the interesting candidates. The corporate media work hard against her, but I think there are many people for whom ending the wars and the new cold war is a priority. Of course, apart from that, she is a progressive similar to Bernie Sanders, but presidents can only focus on a limited amount of issues and what they put in the center of their campaign is what they are most likely to fight for as a president. Furthermore, in many areas, the power of US presidents is rather limited – so, if Bernie Sanders is elected, it is far from certain that Medicare for all is implemented (there might be a compromise that comes closer to it), and if Andrew Yang was elected, the chances of a UBI and the massive tax rise it would require passing Congress where Yang has little support for his platform would probably be rather slim. One area where US presidents do have a lot of power (though they may be fought hard by the deep state) is foreign policy. So, if people want to focus on a single policy issue, I think it is better to support Tulsi Gabbard for trying to stop the neocons than Andrew Yang for ideas that would hardly have a chance of passing through Congress. I don’t think Kamala Harris has a credible anti-interventionist position, and her election would probably mean that lots of Clintonite liberal-neocons would again come into the highest ranks of power. Bernie Sanders is less interventionist than the corporate Democrats, but he is much more wishy washy than Tulsi Gabbard and in contrast to her does not emphasize this issue (and neither does Andrew Yang, even though it is a part of his platform, and that he repeats dumb evidencefree Russiagate conspiracy platitudes does not bode well). I think Gabbard‘s anti-interventionism has support among the left, independents, and even some conservatives might swallow her generally progressive positions (at least, she is not the extreme SJW type of progressives).
As far as UBI is concerned, I think we should consider that a) $1000 is really something it is difficult to live on and b) even for that modest sum, massive tax increases would be required. If it was financed by VAT, prices of goods would go up massively, so that either it would have to accepted that the amount that was paid out to everyone was one people clearly could not even survive on or the amount would have to be increased. If it was financed by higher income taxes, just increasing taxes for the rich would not be enough, and the majority of people having a work income would be worse off because the additional taxes would take away from them more (in many cases far more) than $1000 a month.
UBI is an idea that may look good as long as people look at it only superficially, but as soon as you deal with the actual numbers, it loses most of its appeal. Under very different economic conditions in the future, it may be a good idea, but now, it would hardly make sense. Unfortunately, people rarely deal with the details (and general doubts about economics as a discipline is certainly no excuse for not looking at the details and just supporting something because it sounds nice).
In Switzerland, there had been a vote about UBI (it was rejected by a wide margin), and therefore, there were more studies that looked at the details. The Swiss proposal was about $2500 a month (actually 2500 Swiss Francs, but the exchange rate has been hovering around 1 for some time) because clearly noone can live on $1000 a month in Switzerland. This would have been around a third of GDP, and there are serious doubts whether this would have been possible, at all (there are some limits as to how much taxes can be raised, businesses and people who are able to earn high wages will leave the country). $1000 a month would probably have been somehow possible, but it would still have meant a massive tax raise that a majority would never approve, and $1000, as mentioned, is an amount noone can live on (most people‘s rents alone are probably above that).
What I disagree with even more is the international applicability. While I am generally a UBI skeptic, the idea of $1000 in the US is probably not amongst the most unrealistic. While I have some doubt that people can really live on $1000 a month, it is certainly more realistic in the US than in Switzerland or Norway. When we investigate the conditions under which a UBI is most realistic, the result is that the bigger economic inequality is, the more realistic a UBI people can live on is. When there is a class of people who live in poverty, a market for really cheap housing, goods and services develops (you don‘t see that in Switzerland or Norway), and when, at the same time, rich people are a significant part of the economy, financing a UBI on that poverty subsistence level becomes realistic. In Western Europe and Japan, where economic inequality is on a much lower level than in the US, financing a UBI people can live on would hardly be possible (and the existing welfare state that is much more modest in only giving money to people who need it makes much more sense). Of course, in a number of European countries, unlike in Switzerland or Norway, people would actually be able to survive on $1000 a month, but of course, most Eurpean countries have a GDP per capita that is much below the one in the US, Switzerland, and Norway, so they could not finance $1000 a month (and on the amount they could finance, people could not survive).
So even if the US Congress passed a massive tax rise on a probably unprecedented scale in order to pay $1000 to everyone (which I consider extremely unlikely), the international significance would be limited because that would only be realistic for countries with very high economic inequality (as measured by Gini index or any other measure that makes sense) – perhaps Russia or China (though I have some doubts), but certainly not Europe (apart from Russia) or Japan.
In Yang’s favor (for me) is that he doesn’t appear to harbor the hatred of whites that nearly all the other Democrats have, or at least he’s not interested in ethnic pandering at the expense of whites. That’s pretty huge, so despite whatever objections I might have politically, if I had to have a president who is left of center it would be someone who isn’t trying to stoke identity politics.
However, I have doubts about UBI – it might look good initially, but I have to believe the inflationary effect of everyone having a bit more income will eat away at its utility, and then it’s just going to be another program where the benefit has to be constantly ratcheted up along with taxes and no one is really any further ahead.
I also doubt that the base of the party would be interested in stanching immigration or making them wait 18 years for this or any other benefit – how could they be captured as future voters otherwise? Much of the left feels the legacy population has a moral duty to sacrifice their well-being for the benefit of the more diverse and vibrant immigrant class. Yang might not hate us, but a huge part of the Democratic base does and that isn’t going away anytime soon.
A lot of good this red carpet treatment did for Hillary in 2016. The presence of Trump in the White House indicates (surprisingly!) that the process isn’t as well-managed as you’d think, so you need to recalibrate your deep cynicism a bit.
Summary: Yang- Just Another Scam Artist.
If anyone falls for his horseshit, they deserve exactly what they’ll all get- pure horseshit- full in the face .
The Big Question:
Would the federal government get even bigger and be even more intrusive in both US and foreign citizens personal and business lives under Yang, or smaller – by continuing to completely ignore the constitution/bill of rights to an even greater degree than is happening now, under Trump?
Answer: it would be even bigger and more intrusive as far as I [and anyone who has their head screwed on straight] can see.
This just in:
There are no solutions involving more government and more laws. No matter who gains power, or who wins an election, their governments “solutions”, no matter how sincere, will not work. They never have, And they never will.
This should be obvious to anyone who actually bothers to open their eyes, takes the blinders off, and looks around.
“…Once we realize that government doesn’t work, we will stop dreaming that this or that social problem can be solved by passing a law — or by creating a new government program — or by electing someone who will make Washington more efficient or cost-conscious.
Once we realize that government doesn’t work, we’ll know that the only way to improve government is by reducing its size — by doing away with laws, by getting rid of programs, by making government spend and tax less, by reducing government as far as we can.
And once we realize that government doesn’t work, we will know which side of any political issue to cheer for: If the proposal would increase the size, the reach, or the importance of government, it would be a mistake to support it — no matter how honorable its stated purpose. If the proposal would reduce the size, the reach, or the importance of government, it would be an improvement — no matter what its flaws — because it can’t be worse than what it will replace……..” :
“The World’s Biggest, Most Dangerous Scam Is…The “Government Solutions Work” Scam”
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-worlds-biggest-most-dangerous-scam.html
Regards, onebornfree
The Chinese in our America are the real SCAB LABOR!!!!….Not the Robots…
The Chinese in our America are voting us into a racial minority within the borders of America…..not the Robots…..
Richard Spencer…you are a faggot….with a faggot’s lisp….
A few years back many people on the right were discussing the Cloward-Piven strategy out of the Frankfurt School at Columbia. This is basically a Marxist plan to collapse the state under the burden of welfare and other socialist wealth transfers from the white middle class. Everyone could see what the Democrat party of Nobel Peace Prizes, Global Warming and Social Justice were up to, but no one dared to fight the empire.
Up until now, the white working classes have been under the misconception that there was hope, that the US still represents their interests and concerns. This illusion, after this never ending war of the left against Trump supporters illustrated, is shattered.
So now, why should white millenials struggle at extreme disadvantage to support a system that has disenfranchised them, bankrupted them, and is seeking to silence them too.
Bring the stinking edifice to corruption down. Bring the empire down. Spend your $12000/year on guns and grub.
I like it. Expats for Yang for President.
So your voting for someone….a China Gook Han…..who wants to expand the scale of the H1b..L1B program=VOTE WHITEY INTO A RACIAL MINORITY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF AMERICA….
Are you a fag with a lisp like Richy Spencer?
The opposition to UBI because it undermines the work ethic is obsolete. Because automation. In the not too distant future only about 15 or 20 percent of people will have work. This work will pay well and people who have it will be much better off then the proles on UBI only.
Yang’s plan needs some improvements though:
UBI or not, unless you are ready to go full Ancap there will always be some kind of welfare for the unemployed. The current system is an expensive bureaucratic nightmare. The cost of administering it is ridiculous, as well as the opening for government interference in private lives. The biggest benefit of UBI is that it is simple to administer, non-intrusive and cuts all that red tape. Yang is talking about letting welfare recipients keep their current entitlements if they wish to opt out of UBI. This totally defeats the purpose. When UBI is introduced, all entitlements must be abolished at the same time.
Funding it with a VAT is a really, really bad idea. Bad economics. Not only is it a regressive tax, falling most heavily on the lower middle class, it also damps down economic activity across the board. Income tax is bad enough, but VAT is worse. We should look into some kind of tax on speculation like the “Tobin Tax” or transaction tax. Lots of money is made in the current economy in totally non-productive ways, speculation and usury. Some wonks have calculated that you could replace all other taxes with a 1/2 percent tax on all financial transactions. Of course, Wall Street wouldn’t like it.
UBI needs to be limited to full citizens only. Period. No exceptions. Else it becomes a migrant magnet and would very soon bankrupt and ruin the country.
Andy Ostroy is all over the internet denouncing Trump, and advocating for Hispanic illegal immigrants despite Ostroy’s wife being murdered by one:
Maybe Ostroy opposes the conventional white gentile wisdom and thinks a wall and deportations are counter productive and lead to more murders, or maybe him being Jewish has a bearing on his, to me counter-intuitive, reaction. How could weakening the ethnic defense by white gentiles of a country they still control be a winning strategy? It is such a mystery how Jews like Ostroy (COE of his own marketing company) fail to follow their long tern ethnic interests, because their persuasive powers and clear sighted analysis are altruistically put at the service of the goyim. What probity!
The actual scientists and engineers working on AI have predicted imminent success without ever raising the safety issue, they think it is sci fi. As Eliezer Yudkowsky says, an IGI will certainly not say “Let me out the box and give me all your money”. Any UBI will be concomitant with A(G)I progress. There will be unbearable popular pressure for more advanced AI and thus a greater UBI. At some point there is going to be something that can out-think humans and their tame machines. Alpha Zero already is that something though in a tiny domain. By the way, a favorite tactic of Alpha Zero was to send a pawn right up its file to hem in the opposing king’s movements.
However, I don’t think it is so much the case that politics will be manipulated by an AGI. No the the whole world system is as never before built on future growth. How can any politician refuse to allow science to solve these problems? DeepMind ‘s Hassabis has suggested the main safety measure would be an agreement for whichever AI research team began to make strides toward an artificial general intelligence to halt their project for a complete solution to the control problem prior to proceeding. Bostrom had pointed out in his book that such a halt by a lead project might be likely to motivate a lagging country to a catch-up crash program or even physical destruction of the project suspected of being on the verge of success.
One word: Confederacy. Send the Yankees and their empire of greed and corruption to hell.
The automation discussion reminds us of Keynes:
http://www.econ.yale.edu/smith/econ116a/keynes1.pdf
But when the quantity of free time increases (as a result of increasing worker productivity due to technology), then there will be more consumption, not less.
Even if we talk about online content – we have more free time now, because we have so much value-added productivity in our work, that online entertainment content is largely consumed in the office.
Aside from encouraged various games – I see so much procrastination, so many people watching YouTube videos on wireless headphones, reading online newspapers, and posting on Facebook. At the same time, there is a high productivity from the same people.
It seems to be a proposal to increase welfare payments, including to unemployed people. But America does not need this, as even poor and unemployed Americans have more money than the middle class workers of most countries in the world.
For poor in America, the problem is lack of medical services for people without jobs, and the crazy costs of their higher education.
Excluding those two factors, even poor African Americans in Detroit, have the newest iPhones and buy the same Nikes that Elon Musk was wearing at the Model Y presentation on Thursday night.
Negative view to “automation” (which is just increasing computer technology), is same view as the luddites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
Luddites thought that machines would replace peoples’ jobs – but in reality it just means we can utilized same people for different jobs.
Reducing need for certain jobs, as result of more capital-intensive production, just means the labour is now free for other uses.
The problem is mobility of labour, and laziness and affluenza of the young generation in America.
An intelligent society should desire people have incentives to actively find and create new jobs, not that a government encourage the population to remain lazy in their room, receiving universal basic income.
Lol but if there is some geopolitical strategy to convert the American culture away from “Protestant work ethic”, then it should be encouraged.
After Trump totally embarrassed the 16 other GOP flunkies in 2016 to cruise to the nomination, and given that the country is even more divided than it was then, I find it hard to believe that they will go for Very Old traditional candidates like Bernie and Biden. Bernie, for pete’s sake, was born Before Pearl Harbor. And Kamala is the black Hillary. Yang could beat all those half-wits. And beating Trump could be a no-brainer.
Ask Yang if he had met NZ shooter Tarrents 5 years ago and understood Mr Tarrents craziness would Yang have given Tarrents $1000 a month?
The Brenton Tarrents mass murder in NZ might be an interesting application of the UBI theory. Tarrents apparently inherited a small sum and managed to increase it through investment in crypto currency ponzi schemes, indicating a high level of wisdom and even intelligence. He took the money and traveled the third world apparently reading white nationalist message boards between bouts of video game playing and maybe drug use. If he did not have the financial resources to do that he probably would not have been radicalized. Yang is sort of thinking people will use the $1000 month the same harmless way he would.
What I personally wonder about is before giving out $1000 a month why not reduce the Social Security FICA tax for nongovernment employment. There are heaps of regulations that make it difficult to offer employment to people in the private sector.
It only steals from you if you’re buying more than $10,000 worth of crap every month. In practice probably more like if you’re spending $30-50,000 month.
That’s a year’s worth of income for the average member of the white working class.
SJW is now called The Outrage Mob or TOM.
If the US could have gone bankrupt it would have a long time ago. Long live fiat money!
And those two will be in charge of the House until the Day They Die. That could be another 20 years, unless the world ends in 12. Take that AOC.
It’s a meme you idiots. Trump is the only viable presidential candidate in America. And he will stay that way. Yang is a liberal democrat. His free cash scam is literally a meme. People are “supporting” him as a joke, and many of this site’s writers have been taken in.
Gabbard’s biggest problem is that Hawaii is in the Middle of the friggin’ Pacific Ocean. It’s not even a real state and should have never been made one. Obama, with long term planning, not only moved from Hawaii to Illinois but married a black woman. If Tulsi had been thinking ahead she would have at least had a child before now. People are suspicious of childless candidates, as they have no biological stake in the future. That could sink Kamala too.
You are guilty of taking Yang’s comment out of context. That has become the modern terminal disease. Twitter rules! No wonder the average IQ continues to tumble.
A. Karlin said: “2. The Alt Right has defected to #YangGang en masse.”
Assuming that’s true, here’s a quick translation for ya’ll :
“The same morons who were fooled by Trump’s blather are now fully prepared to be fooled by Yang’s blather” .
As Forest Gump says : ” Stupid is as stupid does” .
“The Donald Trump “Make America Great Again” Scam…..or, “Why Donald Trump Won’t Work””:
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2017/05/why-donald-trump-wont-work.html
“The World’s Biggest, Most Dangerous Scam Is…The “Government Solutions Work” Scam”:
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-worlds-biggest-most-dangerous-scam.html
“You,Trump,Sanders Etc., Vs “Dictator Syndrome””:
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2015/08/do-you-suffer-from-dictator-syndrome.html
Regards, onebornfree
A characteristic of finance capitalist economies is to move highly fungible capital wherever it can find labor at lowest cost.
When the U.S. invented semiconductor chips and then the internet, it soon moved overseas, most especially to China. Wall Street even green mailed captains of industry to move or “else.” Today, Chinese Capital is seeking gains in Africa and South America. American’s never got to benefit from their own patrimony, the past was sold off for today’s arbitrage.
A characteristic of INDUSTRIAL CAPITALISM is that it injects state credit into industry, to then benefit the local economy and the nation. A characteristic of a MIXED ECONOMY, is that it recognizes that not all markets are elastic priced. A characteristic of Douglas Social Credit, it that it returns purchasing power back to the base of the population. A characteristic of money, especially debt based money, is that it makes exponential demands of debtors, out of alignment with nature’s S curve.
So, the answer is not more finance capitalism, nor is it communism.
Answer:
1) Public Banks or Public Money option to fix the debt problem.
2) Injection of Debt Free into the commons, which is something like UBI
3) Industrial Capitalism, which is in alignment with a nation’s interests, not that of globalists.
4) Mixed economy mode, which is in opposition to Libertarian “free dumb” arguments that economies are mostly elastic -where only prices matter.
We can see that lowest prices are not left up to the market, the market will have rent seekers and plutocrats doing their best to take a free lunch for themselves.
Robotic factories will accrue “capital” to themselves, to make more robots, to then disenfranchise labor, which then means there is no market for the robotic output.
The gig’s up. The above 4 things have to be done.
It seems UBI is gaining steam but there’s a lot of bad economics and confusion behind it and very little “good economics” arguing against it. (I personally don’t support UBI but I see why it’s growing in popularity)
What I’ve seen/heard so far (in argument against) have been very weak and impotent amounting to name-calling and fearmongering about costs and inflation. They’ve gotta do better than that!
UBI is also being conflated with welfare. To the extent UBI is no more than a variant of welfare, then more people, including me, would be on board. But insofar as UBI is a handout for everyone, it’s not the same as welfare and should be noted as such.
I don’t agree, but over the short run it’s possible. Over the long run, there will always be jobs.
But assuming you’re right, does UBI actually fix the disease of automation and a few technocrats owning all the robots? Isn’t UBI just giving the masses “cake” and keeping them from rioting?
What sort of economy do we have if a few oligarchs control most of the wealth and means of production? Is UBI really the solution to this problem?
If there is UBI, it should replace and subsume the current welfare system.
From 1956, Admiral Ben Moreell – https://fee.org/articles/of-bread-and-circuses/
I wouldn’t worry about Yang getting the nomination.
The DNC and the shadowy figures behind it will ensure that does not happen.
That’s what the MMT is for.
To paraphrase Love Story:
‘MMT means never having to say you’re broke’.
An argument based on queasy misgivings isn’t going to work against UBI. And Yang already has an answer for this: there is no inflation. We’ve had bailouts, QE and NIRP predicated on deflationary fears. We’ve given billions to banks and too big to fail. So if free money is good for the rich, why isn’t it good for the rest of us?
If technology and automation are destroying blue collar careers and service jobs, what’s the solution? Maybe UBI is absolutely the wrong prescription, but the status quo also won’t do. Someone has to reign in the oligarchs.
Personally, I’m against UBI for everyone (except as an alternative to welfare), but I’m not hearing compelling arguments against it.
Well said. Thanks.
AK said:
Any amount of additional border security is worthless if you don’t also eliminate the asylum loopholes.
Illegal immigration is largely a sideshow. The main driver of demographic change is legal chain migration. So it is most important to pass something like the RAISE Act, which would eliminate extended-family chain migration and visa lottery, reducing the number of green cards from from 1.2 million to 700,000 per year. If politically necessary, you could make up the difference by increasing skills-based immigration, although this would not be ideal.
A “path to citizenship” for illegals without first eliminating chain migration will set off a new wave of low-skill legal immigration. Permanent legal status without the prospect of citizenship is better anyway.
Perhaps UBI is needed, but in what sense is it NOT welfare? (Although Yang couldn’t dare call it that). Most of those on welfare are either disabled, working for an insufficient wage, or did work at some point in the past. That’s all we need, UBI as yet another cruel cudgel to stigmatize the poor.
From my understanding, UBI is money for everyone. It’s meant to shore up the lower middle and middle classes and soften capitalism’s sharp edges. It’s supposed to be the answer to technology and AI. It’s not just for the indigent. It’s not welfare for the poorest. It’s unabashed wealth redistribution for all.
” with immigration reform talk becoming little more than pointless political whitewash.”
Like now you mean ?
Don’t trust him!
Obama rode into the white house on a promise of no more wars, hope and change whichbwas what the majority wanted and he betrayed all those promised.
Trump rode into the white house by exploiting discontent and anger and so far he has not done anything that any other old party politician would have.
Yang will be no different. All talk and empty promises meant to silence and limit populist outrage.
I’m not doubting whatsoever that more diversity will bring more violence, as humans are tribal by nature. But wouldn’t that mean he should pursue a policy that reduces that diversity by cutting immigration? Instead, just like Trump, he pays lip service to “border security” while wanting to throw the front door wide open with unlimited legal immigration to the Asian horde, thereby increasing the problem that he identified.
And he thinks that a mere $12,000 a year could make a difference? Does he really think Americans are that cheap to buy? The majority of Americans want to reduce immigration because we think the protestant culture is being destroyed by a bunch of people who bring bad culture into this country: the culture of dishonesty, greed, misogyny, violence, criminality, horrible manners etc., and yes that includes the “best and brightest” Asian horde that he wants to swamp the country with.
More and more Indians I’ve encountered are mediocre at best in aptitude, but arrogant and tribal, most of them lied on their resumes to get their jobs. Majority of Chinese in this country are corrupt government officials and businessmen here to enjoy life with their ill gotten gains. If these third world hordes really are that great, their countries wouldn’t be such shitholes that they all wanted to escape from.
In small numbers we assimilate them, in large numbers they assimilate us. In 10 years Asians will make up 10% or more of the population, and they will overwhelm us with their shit cultures and turn us into just like where they came from: another shithole of dishonesty, misogyny, bad manners, dog-eat-dog, every man for himself, and eat the losers. The (((globalists))) want them in here because that’s what their culture is like too.
Yang is not a patriot and he does not want what is best for America. Rather, he wants to hasten America’s demise. To vote for him is to give up on America. What America needs is a 40 year moratorium on immigration, to send packing all non-citizens, and root out the treasonous elements in this country — the globalist elites who are killing this country for their own gains and the deep state that they are propping up to achieve that end, not $1,000 a month. I’m saying this as a patriotic, unhyphenated American of East Asian descent. Yang is just another treasonous rat and I will most surely not be voting for him.
Jan 15, 2019 Regulation vs Anarchy: A Last Chance to Free Humanity
Gidi Bar Zakay takes the side of regulation and Jeff Berwick takes the side of Anarchy in this debate at the Israeli Bitcoin Summit 2019
https://youtu.be/fOWpZem6ZvQ
The Tale of the Slave
An excerpt from ‘Anarchy, State, and Utopia’ by Robert Nozick Consider the following sequence of cases, which we shall call the Tale of the Slave, and imagine it is about you.
https://fee.org/articles/the-tale-of-the-slave/?utm_medium=related_widget
With all this talk about UBI is anyone addressing the needs of the disabled. My daughter worked until 100% disabled in 2007. She receives $1100 each month from SSDI. Not enough to support herself. This amount has not been increased since 1985. Will UBI apply to her and other disabled persons?
I support UBI for developed world but not developing world/Russia (i don’t know enough about China). To have successful UBI program, you need advanced robotic manufacturing base. Russia has like 68 robots in the entire country. Once Russia gets up to speed on industrial manufacturing, then we talk. West/Japan will have no problem with UBI, there it will be rather desirable to support consumption.
Also, the whole thing about technology creating more jobs that we can’t even imagine is a lie.
Here is a list of careers in US by population.
https://www.careeronestop.org/Toolkit/Careers/careers-largest-employment.aspx?currentpage=1&pagesize=50&nodata=#a
Substitute Wagon Drivers for Truck Drivers and you wouldn’t even know if you left Middle Ages – it’s all Shop Clerks, Office Clerks, nurse care, and some drivers plus janitors. If you traveled back in time to the 18th century and told George Washington that the most popular jobs in the US in the year 2016 were Shop Clerks and Tavern Wenches, he would shrug, but he most certainly be able to imagine them.
All those jobs are vulnerable to automation though.
Automation of Agriculture gave us Debt Bomb of the Roaring 20’s followed by Great Depression (25% unemployment and WW2).
Automation of Industry gave us Debt Bomb of the 2000’s with Great Financial Crisis and another, even bigger Debt Bomb (current total global debt is $250 trillion or so). This will end in either WW3, or we will need to learn how to better distribute incomes from those debt sales, and UBI seems like a good contender.
After services get automated, there won’t be anything left for the majority of people to do that machines won’t be able to do better. And once debt hits $quadrillion just to support all those make work jobs, it will be rational to ask to why? To what end? Robots don’t care about money, and money is fake digits on a computer anyway.
The only reason Asians haven’t been shot up already is because the white men who would be doing the shooting took a liking to Asian women and Asian women practically LUH-UHVE them back. I see you took his words to heart, but don’t kid yourself.
” At some point of automation-immiseration, capitalism will no longer have the consumers to sustain its own production.”
Karlin, you know there’s no evidence for that idea whatsoever. Consumption inequality might get worse (doubtful), but capitalism will always have the consumers to sustain its own production. Automation is also virtually never immiserating in general. And, regardless, the Greater Stagnation is just beginning.
UBI still suffers from the “who’s paying” and “who’s benefiting” problems.
Yankees have thoroughly colonized the old Confederacy. Virginia is long gone. Let’s not even talk about Florida. North Carolina and Georgia are half gone. Tennessee and South Carolina have strong signs of a takeover. I see some initial signs in Alabama too.
And I wouldn’t consider Texas as part of the South. It is its own state-region. But in terms of Californian-takeover, they’re where NC and GA are in terms of local population dilution, plus massive Mexican immigration.
Sometimes things may happen that are not let happen.
The problem the elite may have with Yang is that he is a male Asian. Capable, poorly susceptible to manipulation, and above all it would be counter-productive to throw racist attacks at him (unlike a white male), because his racial cohort would take a lot of umbrage, again, unlike whites who are the only group keen to support racism against their own group.
Not true about SSDI. Just like SS retirement, it is adjusted for inflation every year. But I agree that UBI, if it ever becomes law, should apply to anyone, not used as an offset against welfare or any other government programs. Otherwise these people would be left even further behind, due to the growing inflation it will surely engender.. Imagine the optics of awarding Romney $1000/month, while applying a “means test” against the poor?
Not after the UBI-caused inflation will have run its course.
“Illegals can’t get UBI for at least 18 years.”
That may be the intention, but it won’t be the reality. Just as the democrats have lowered the American voting age from 21 to 18 (and continue trying to lower it to 16 + give it to illegals + give them drivers licenses), there will be extreme pressure from all of their constituent groups to get a piece of the pie. That 18 years figure will certainly come down until the system is insolvent: first 18 is proposed, then 10 is adopted in legislation, then it’s later lowered to 7 then to 4 all while masses of immigrants illegally pour in with the expectation of soon getting their Yang Bucks (TM) … and with the opposition party no longer a political threat at the ballot box, there will be little to stop this process from occurring.
And contrary to the assertion that this program will hurt nations like Russia while benefiting the US, it may very well end up doing the opposite. There is an old line of thinking in the US that the arms build up of the 1970s and 1980s hurt the Soviets far more than the Americans and hastened the end of the Cold War because the US was in a better position to pay for the expenditures; the Soviet Union was reduced to importing Western grain by the 80s, etc. I think this program might see a reverse of that. The Russians and others may adopt a similar program but exercise fiscal restraint. Meanwhile, the US spirals off into Venezuelan levels of economic mismanagement at about the same moment the petrodollar begins to wane (inevitable at some point because the US can’t run these kinds of deficits forever) and large unfunded pension liabilities can no longer be met.
Yang is just a meme. The congress will never give you $1000 just as they refused to fund Trump’s wall. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves. In 2020, he’s going down to Kamala Harris. I think this may be the country’s turning point – democracy gets exposed as an unworkable sham. I’ve always wondered what would happen if a candidate who should obviously win (Yang) got defeated by a racist bigot like Kamala Harris due almost solely to racial block voting.
The Deep State got away with illegally bugging anyone who works for him so everyone in DC knows that if they genuinely work for Trump and have any kind of dirt in their back story then Mueller will get them like he got Manafort and Kelly.
Trump is like a general with an army of enlisted men but no loyal officers – he can order his colonels to move their units to x, y, z but they don’t obey cos they’re all scared of being taken out by a corrupt FBI.
There’s been a coup and Mueller is el Presidente.
“UBI still suffers from the “who’s paying” and “who’s benefiting” problems.”
It’s very simple. Who is paying – Central Banks. They have been paying for the past decade at least. No changes there. Who is benefiting – general population, in case of UBI, or the already rich asset owners when the inevitable QE and negative interest rates get unleashed to prop up consumption again. There is really no alternative.
Fact 1. Vast majority of jobs are already unproductive (we wouldn’t need $250 trillion in debt to support current consumption if they were).
Fact 2. Global debt will explode going forward in the $quadrillion range, otherwise economy will melt down as unproductive jobs are eliminated and so is consumption that came with those unproductive jobs. See 2008-2009 for illustration.
Fact 3. Money will be printed. It is inevitable. Nobody will put up with social upheaval if it went otherwise.
The only question remaining – who gets that printed money? Asset owners in case of negative interest rates, or general public in case of UBI? For social stability reasons, my vote is UBI.
translation: keep them sedated while they are destroyed
UBI is intended as a technocratic sedative.
imo the way to flip it into an accelerationist policy is not by trying to corrupt blue collar MAGA people into gibsmedat but use it to light a fire among the already gibs-orientated Dem base to show how corrupted the system has become.
they don’t pay anything – they lend and get it back with interest.
the public pays.
one of the great scams is the idea that the welfare state is Leftist – it partly is but in terms of cui bono the big winners from deficit spending are the banking mafia.
talking about automation while ignoring immigration/off-shoring
=
banking mafia scam
“Yankees have thoroughly colonized the old Confederacy. ”
Actually my comment was about more than than this. Confederacy, thats what the US would have been had it not been for the freemasons. Confederacy, because the Yankees destroyed the country over it. Confederacy, because it is the best way to pass sovereignty down to state cities, counties and villages, and even individuals. Confederacy, because it is the best path to eliminate Washington DC and set up a new government that allows each state to pursue its own path. Confederacy, because the US government needs to take its grubby hands of off all the land that they stole from the states.
sure – i don’t think UBI would bankrupt the USA* i’m saying a lot of the alt-right support for Yang is because they think UBI is accelerationist.
(*nothing will bankrupt the USA until the dollar loses reserve currency status which it won’t until the USA loses global hegemonic status which on current trends is what, 20 years away at most?)
UBI is meant as a sedative until the collapse although it might be possible to flip it into being accelerationist.
“they don’t pay anything – they lend and get it back with interest.”
This would imply their balance sheets would be shrinking. That’s just not going to happen. Fed tried that and stock market tanked.
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/2018/11/12/2nd-half-2018-change-in-size-of-central-bank-balance-sheets
Central Banks can lower interest rates as needed, and will buy any assets, as needed, for UBI, just like they have done for the current debt expansion. They have to do this anyway to avoid recession. Might as well spend the money on UBI.
national capitalism
right – the real question is whether pushing UBI among the other Dem candidates is a good idea or not
Would you have some numbers to support the above, please?
I did ask the same question several times on this site and only once got, sort of reasonable, answer.
And, the same for this:
As for this:
Any idea of what kind of “other uses” those could be?
Practical examples would be most welcome. Say…..a man in his late 30’s who spent 20 years in car industry, for example, became a foreman etc..and then the factory moved to China.
What, exactly, could be those “other uses” for him?
Like, perhaps: a security officer? A….what?
Not only money but overall dignity of work too. I mean, I am sure he could be a servant, for minimal wages, of course, for the affluent.
The UBI can, at least, give a man a chance for not playing the game rigged against it. “If I can’t win, will always lose, well….I won’t play. ”
Who of us here, well, except a couple of posters, haven’t experienced a similar position?
The slow, but steady increase in work demands, decrease of pay and working conditions overall, job security too, hence higher obedience to those above etc. The increasing gap in money and power. And I am talking white collar professionals here. Labour, of course, too. Working class got it much worse. You could be a top consultant, but…hehe…you are still labor. And, working class types can’t, as white collar, go freelance, consultancy etc.
Well, with something as UBI they can, at least say, “fuck you. I am not cleaning your toilets and walking your dogs. And I don’t need to grovel every now and then before officials when they revise my unemployment benefits. Just……fuck….you”.
Now, of course, there are other ways to say the same but let’s leave it out of this thread.
this is correct, capitalism is in the process of destroying itself so anti-UBI arguments based on “muh communism” aren’t going to work on the “yellow vest” demographic who are the first to be shoved off the cliff. if people don’t like muh communism then they should build a ****ing wall.
“There’s been a coup and Mueller is el Presidente.”
Maybe, but I doubt it. There are ways around that for a smart, ruthless guy willing to wage a scorched earth response. I think the more likely explanation, as detailed in the Michael Wolfe book, is that Trump is an extremely vain person who needs near constant praise and emotional validation; hence, his hiring a disproportionate number of very attractive women to hang around him and soothe his ego 24/7. Trump, a wimp with character flaws, simply gave up and went with what would get him the most praise from the media he’s obsessed with.
it’s simple logic
at the limit if all the work is being done by robots there’s no consumers – obviously.
the reason is wages are on both sides of the equation
– wages as production cost
– wages as source of demand
so driving wages to zero drives demand to zero.
this means
1) there is an optimal price of labor for any particular economy*
2) if capitalism is presented with an unlimited supply of labor it will destroy itself through competing for ever cheaper labor and in the process destroying demand.
(* some function of natural resources and human capital?)
Handing out printed money isn’t “lending”.
Unless paper is now really expensive.
true but lending money to governments to hand out and then getting repaid with interest is lending
Anatoly,
Please remind me who Yang is. I surf the blogs four to five hours a day (I know this is an exuberance but I’m retired) … and I’ve never heard of Yang.
The real issue: is Yang a trope, stereotype, cliché, motif, aphorism, meme, or theme? This is important in the Postmodern world with respect to artistic and relativistic figures of speech versus direct or oblique references to reality.
However, Yang will have to do better than $1,000 to buy my vote. I want free 100 GB Internet and free ocean cruises to exotic destinations. And I DEMAND that my WHITE PRIVILEGE give me more than any Third World run-of-the-mill illegal immigrant.
The problem: my taste for French wines is getting more expensive as I write. I regret that my great-great-great-great-great-grandfather’s slavery in Britain no longer qualifies for reparations. That aside, I demand that the state subsidize my current culinary indiscretions. I place my recompense much higher than the claim of a recent immigrant from Nigeria, who by happenstance, won the visa lottery.
Clifford Hughes Douglas
http://www.socred.org/
Douglas took note while working at a bomber factory during period before WW2, that the workers could not buy their output. There was a gap between what was produced and the prices that were distributed to labor.
Douglas answer was social credit (not Chinese social credit).
Russia still needs to inject to overcome the gap so purchasing power is given back to the producers, so they can buy their output.
Robots only exacerbate the problem and make it more obvious.
There is also a gap created by debt money, which makes the holders of debt instruments (mostly banks and finance types) suck up capital from labor in a pyramid style operation.
Russia has both of these problems, debt money and production gaps.
Russia does inject into families to overcome fertility collapse.
Yes, he should limit immigration as much as he can. This is one part of his platform I don’t like, but look at what Trump is doing. He is totally cucking out while another Democrat will have an even worse immigration policy than Yang.
Will $1,000 a month make a difference? Yes I believe it will. It will not fix America but it will do a lot to take off the edge. Right now we are still a prosperous country. Imagine what it will be like when we face a major depression and most the jobs are automated out. It could get absolutely brutal.
Central Banks don’t pay. Central Banks were created by the private banking system to backstop their corporate credit.
Central private banks like the FED, are the lender of last resort to the banking system. For example, the FED will make reserves available on the overnight market, at the last minute. Banks have 48 hours to find reserves AFTER making a loan.
Central banks act post-facto. Central Banks act to buy up securities on the overnight market, to then control interest rates. They also swap money with each other to control exchange rates.
OK? Even QE is not printing money, it is swaps of TBills for Cash, where the FED creates Cash on its keyboard. This is why there was no hyperinflation.
Yang is simply recyling money captured in taxes (VAT) and reinjecting.
Yes, he should tax rents and unearned income, and should also spend debt free money, but this argument would be too sophisticated for lumpen-proletariat American’s. Ergo, Yang’s message has to be simple sound bites.
With regards to “yellow peril” some of the commentators here are concerned about, Yang has noted that his son’s are “weak” and he wants them to grow up in a high trust country not in the grips of race war; That identity politics are a function of Plutocracy setting racial groups against each other. And yes, our Plutocratic friends are often Jews, which means they will be gunning for Yang.
Remember also that East Asians are victims of Negro crime, as Asians are considered easy marks. Negroes in turn are Jewish pets, especially as Negroes were given victim status by the Jewish created NAACP, and subsequent Jewish legal action – which benefited our ((friends)), who push for their own victim status.
Today can also be seen as proliferating “victim” classes, who have their hands out for gibsmedats. Yang’s UBI injection, puts a stop to a lot of the BS in one fell swoop.
It all depends on (((who))) is doing the lending.
You’re a least right about that.
I just read thru Trump’s 2019 budget.
All I can say is…..oh my fucking, fucking gawd !
He has for one thing eviscerated by program eliminations the agriculture and farmers sector. Those in the heartland that voted for him are dead in the water if this budget passes.
He has shut down/eliminated ALL consumer , food and water safety agencies and thrown that responsibility onto the states to contract with private contractors.
I cant even go on about all of whats in it…..it makes me too sick.
He has basically eliminated ALL agencies and programs and given them to private corporations—this includes coop electric companies, any community water resources and services, public lands, etc….almost everything he eliminated was on a wish list of the corporations as new profit centers they can take over without having to buy them. You would think Mr. Art of the Deal would have at least planned to make the private corps waiting in the wings pay the gov and communities for taking over their resources and services.
He cut down Medicare by punishing doctors charges if they send too many patients to the hospital.
Shut down funding for such US institutions as the Woodard Wilson Center but didnt reduce funding for the Holocaust museums .
If you opened up Trump what you would see is the rotting, putrid guts of a dead alligator.
I have to go get a barf bag …
FISCAL YEAR 2019
AMERICAN
BUDGET
BUDGET OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET | OMB.GOV
FISCAL YEAR 2019
MAJOR SAVINGS
AND REFORMS
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 2018
GENERAL
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2019-MSV/pdf/BUDGET-2019-MSV.pdf
You might as well try blowing air up a horses ass. The “Dem” base is in essence the coalition of white haters. Please explain how you are going to show these mind controlled zombies “how corrupted the system has become”?
The mere fact that a mentally healthy cis-gender white is trying to “show” anything merely adds to their guilt in the Dem base. You simply cannot treaty with brain dead zombies.
Yang’s UBI is offered as an offset.
If you are getting some sort of benefit transfer from the American people in excess of $1000, then after UBI you will be getting the same amount, not less.
For example, you receive 1500 worth of benefits, then after UBI it will be $1000 + $500 = $1500.
In other words, to make the budget, existing benefits become absorbed into UBI calculations.
Injecting into the economy will also increase economic activity, so the argument is that UBI is self sustaining…..not a cost burden.
It is also efficient, as it does not require a huge bureaucracy taking their cut.
Prove to us that Yang is bought and paid for by the “Plutocracy.” Finance Capitalist Plutocrats must be controlling Yang for your thesis to be correct.
Simple question? Do finance plutocrats want their debt instruments to be paid off in $1000 dollar increments. Doesn’t this reduce the power or “creditors” to subordinate a debt burdened population?
Any idea that has logical contradictions must be rejected.
I suppose that Ron Unz is all-in in regard to
pushing a no-name mystery Asian promoting welfare bribery as a solution to?
..White people and their associates having any future power or functional culture whatsoever?
Take a welfare payment en masse like Blacks and you will be dependent on it like Blacks, especially after market rates adjust but salaries do not.
This is a formula for a huge nanny state that is not controlled by you and whose poison you need to survive.
How do you think that Blacks can afford to live on no money or minimum wage even in ghettos?
The welfare payments. The lives of Blacks are literally dependent on them, as the payment both allows for their survival but also prevents labor-market-mandatory cost of living increases because the government covers the gap.
The same thing will happen to you.
Right now you have a nanny state that is not controlled by you, but at least you largely survive outside of its poison.
Because of that, market rates cannot adjust upward outside of broad-market salary increases. Your middle class salaries are adequate in terms of the cost of goods. Bonus: you are largely free from welfare-influenced political and cultural control.
When everyone starts taking welfare, those consumer prices will adjust upward, due to the increase in money in circulation, and your salaries will not adjust upward but will be worth what they are now less the welfare payment in terms of purchasing parity (which is all that matters).
Therefore your purchasing power remains the same, your quality of life does not improve at all, but now you are dependent on welfare to keep both purchasing power and quality of life where they were before.
That “the Alt-Right” is largely on-board with Yang is a dubious claim. How does this author know? How do we know who is producing these memes that are promoting a group-destroying policy?
This all reeks of propaganda for an idea that is meant to destroy rather than build.
Do not trust foreigners as your leaders or advisors.
Handing out printed money isn’t “lending”
It true that in a debt money system, when government deficit spends, it issues a TBill at debt. This debt instrument then finds its way to the FED balance sheet where it is monetized.
Ever since Wright Pattman sniffed out the scam, the FED rebates interest on Tbills back to Treasury.
OK? So deficit spending, where the TBill is put onto FED ledger, is new money that enters into money supply, and then becomes savings of the public.
The government’s debt is the public’s savings. This is well known since Godley’s sector equations describe the mechanism.
Unfortunately, since the U.S. is reserve currency, it has to have high deficits to supply the world with reserve dollars – an abuse of Americans, as their money type is used to stimulate other economies.
Actually, Federal Reserve Notes are bank credit of an international corporate cabal, not really a sovereign money type as the founder’s intended for the American people.
Yang’s UBI is recycled dollars taxed out of money supply with VAT. It is not new money created by deficit spending. Or, even if it was, the interest on the TBill is recycled to treasury.
Why would you immigrate third world genetic waste, to then just give them $1000?
The whole of idea of immigration is for finance plutocracy to drive down wages, and to take wage arbitrage on their life energy.
Finance plutocracy (finance capitalism) also wants to export jobs to take wage arbitrage, for example the shipping of jobs to China.
UBI is the opposite of what Finance Capitalists want, and it will self limit illegal immigration.
Legal immigration also should come to a halt, as robotic workforce’s don’t need more labor.
The UBI will increase scrutiny of unwanted labor and naturally put a damper on this idea that we need more people, when it is obvious to all but the most “tarded” that we don’t.
This of course, puts Trump in the ‘tarded” camp. Labor participation rate is already low, as Yang mentions often.
i’m not.
i’m saying instead of directing the Yang memes at MAGA people direct them at the Dem base to start a UBI bidding war among Dem candidates.
i don’t know if it would do any good but it would be funny.
“White people and their associates having any future power or functional culture whatsoever?”
Do you call the current system “functional”? It’s not a coincidence that Millennials and others are gravitating towards socialism. It’s not the just medication they take.
“Take a welfare payment en masse like Blacks and you will be dependent on it like Blacks, especially after market rates adjust but salaries do not.”
Except the current welfare system locks people into the system by penalizing work. UBI doesn’t penalize marginal income.
“This is a formula for a huge nanny state that is not controlled by you and whose poison you need to survive.”
Valid argument, but this is a political argument (not economic) that the dying middle class won’t be very sympathetic to.
“How do you think that Blacks can afford to live on no money or minimum wage even in ghettos?”
Very poorly. But to the extent the current system is dysfunctional, what solution do you offer the middle class?
“Because of that, market rates cannot adjust upward outside of broad-market salary increases. Your middle class salaries are adequate in terms of the cost of goods. Bonus: you are largely free from welfare-influenced political and cultural control.”
Everything is fine in Americaland?
“When everyone starts taking welfare, those consumer prices will adjust upward, due to the increase in money in circulation, and your salaries will not adjust upward but will be worth what they are now less the welfare payment in terms of purchasing parity (which is all that matters).”
But when banks and big corp. took “welfare”, consumer prices didn’t adjust upwards. Banks and big corps. continue to take welfare in the form of low rates and still consumer prices are not adjusting upwards. In fact, the big cry from central banks is deflation. So why do only the rich and connected get access to handouts and monetary accommodation?
“Do not trust foreigners as your leaders or advisors.”
Because homegrown whites have served us so well? But all they do is cuck for Israel and Wall St. and send our children to war to kill other people’s children.
I don’t support UBI, but the reasons against it (from what I’ve gleaned on the web) are pathetically weak and impotent. Little wonder UBI is gaining steam.
talking about the consequences of automation but not immigration/off-shoring when the consequences are exactly the same.
if the current burden is fatal, yes
Asian women practically LUH-UHVE them back.
That’s right. The out-marriage rate for Japanese American women is nearly 100%.
The woman then norms to the values of her husband.
Any group that cannot control their women will soon become absorbed. This is why Jews control their women, and insist that Judaism propagate along matrilineal line.
It would take huge immigration of North East Asians, who then segregate into their own communities, to then became a festering problem. And even then, their low verbal IQ (on average) means they don’t become active in politics.
The Jew problem, and subsequent rise of usury Plutocracy (including shabbos goys who have bought into the narrative) is a much bigger threat.
All immigration needs to come to a full stop, to then prevent dual citizen and in-groups from forming. Yellow Peril is a concern, but only under high immigration rates, which then distort demographics and forms in-groups.
AK said:
Doesn’t matter, he isn’t polling well enough to be in the real debates that people actually watch. He’ll just be one of ten candidates on stage in the handful of debates they hold for the also-rans, in which he won’t have enough speaking time to do any real debating. He’s going nowhere, PredictIt giving him a 10% chance is ridiculous.
Realistically, 90% chance that the nominee will be Sanders, Biden, or Harris. Sanders would easily be the best for Russia, very likely better than Drumpf: He’ll rescue Putin from his stupid cutting of Russia’s defense budget by cutting US defense budget as well, will generally pursue a non-interventionist foreign policy, will try to negotiate a replacement for New START, and probably won’t push for serious ramping up of sanctions.
$12,000 could buy a lot of Americans, and Alt-Right support for Yang is based on despair and hopelessness and a desire to see things burn. I sympathize.
Wall St. has been using welfare to offload part of their wage bill onto the tax payers for a long time.
for example, say you were making an extra $1000/year per immigrant from a lower total wage bill and only paying $100/year per immigrant in increased taxes.
large scale corporate employers are mostly in that situation.
maybe l’autistes will help him out with the Dem base
wwebd said – He has no chance because he does not understand the simple logistics of getting “just enough” votes.
He talks about all the things pro-life voters talk about and then he is too cowardly to say he is going to work against our racist abortion laws, which favor Planned Parenthood’s disproportionate presence in minority communities.
In other words, he is a political naif. No way he is going to win even the white Democratic vote, much less the minority Democratic vote, no matter how much he spends.
If he were pro-life he would be as famous now as Perot was a year before the election he swung to Clinton. He might even be to the Dems, who do not like people like him, what Trump was to the Republicans, who do not like people like Trump, at a similar stage in the election cycle.
But facts are hard to understand even for bright people, and this guy is no Trump, and not even a Perot.
I am going to enjoy watching this guy either get on the learning curve (which would be nice – all he has to do is say he will be neutral on state abortion laws, an average Dem position from not that long ago) or fall off it through what I think is his obvious ignorance of this country. And yes I don’t care if he was born here. Lots of people who were born here are oblivious, too.
“Injecting into the economy will also increase economic activity, so the argument is that UBI is self sustaining…..not a cost burden.”
You really believe this?
“This is why Jews control their women, and insist that Judaism propagate along matrilineal line.”
Ahh… so learn from the Jews? Is that the lesson here?
Whites are so strange. Don’t assimilate and you’re seen as hostile foreigners. Assimilate and you’re viewed as weak and impotent.
Maybe the trick is to assimilate in appearance but not really, preserve your ethnic tribe, rule over you, and make yourself impossible to criticize without inviting accusations of bigotry.
“And even then, their low verbal IQ (on average) means they don’t become active in politics.”
Yes, that’s why they don’t get involved in politics. But if they did, YELLOW PERIL. Either way, you have something up your sleeve to slam them for.
“All immigration needs to come to a full stop, to then prevent dual citizen and in-groups from forming.”
But you praised the Jew for retaining their in-group.
I don’t live in the US, and I don’t visit 4chan/pol/ often. I find the threads tedious. So for me, Yang memes are like artillery landing on the other side of the planet.
I am just smart enough to realize that offering bigger handouts to corrupt people will never solve anything in the long term.
It appears that you are saying no, we need to use Yang Meme Jujutsu to turn all the white hating democrat constituents against each other in a bidding war, and we will get them all to exhaust each other fighting for gibme’s. If your memes can accomplish that, then godspeed, but to me it looks like that has been the rights strategy for 50 years, and we just seem to keep losing battle after battle.
I prefer “I’m mad as hell and I quit. Gibsme UBI”.
I do think a significant portion of Yang’s vocal social-media backers support him precisely because they think the Yang movement will “destroy rather than build.” Call this the ex-MAGA machiavellian wing (alternatively, the “accelerationist” wing.)
Then there is a nihilist wing, people who really want the “payoff” and just don’t care. I don’t expect this wing has real staying power. When people wave away Yang, they’re probably thinking his entire support base consists of these people. Some of this ‘wing’ is in fact pure trolling, but some is not.
These are both theoretical types and both can concurrently exist in the same person. Many of the Yang memes are a variant on this one which combine some of both the above (highway sign on the left: “Unrelenting immigration, degeneracy, feminism, gay pride, and civilizational decline”; highway sign on the right: “Same, but $1,000 a month.” Car swerves towards right).
Both the above are also, it must be said, extremely negative forms of politicking, of course, and will likely be gone with the breeze if a nationalist primary-challenger to Blormpf from the right emerges, which would allow for a positive political outlet again.
Another wing is formed, I’d argue, by the many genuine supporters of UBI as a social policy. UBI has been an idea knocking around on the margins for generations and people of good-conscience have positively supported it, though it has never been mainstreamed. To its credit, this genuine-UBI wing is not engaging in negative or cynical politicking.
Potentially the largest in numerical terms during the primary season (which will start in earnest in a mere 9-10 months) the Chinese/EastAsian “racial vote” wing, which is only important in a few states but notably California’s early March 2020 primary. Yang is openly pitching to them, and a little reading-between-lines, I think, shows some soft form of racialism to be a subtext of a whole lot of his entire pitch. This is, alas, not so dissimilar to the classic Jewish strategy of managing their position in states in which there is a large local majority of which the Jews are at least a little wary.
Finally, there is a technocrat-elitist wing that may coalesce around Yang, and this latter camp is I think where Anatoly Karlin fits in, based on reading his OP.
The technocratic-elitist wing is a very good asset for anyone to have, obviously, in that they are among society’s most talented people. As a class, though, the technocrat-elitists are temperamentally largely apolitical. They defaulted to Hillary in 2016 and will tend to default to any D in today’s culture because the Left controls the cultural apparatus, the media, and effectively the state. It should be stressed again that technocrat-elitists are usually not political people. They are people who will make the best of things in any system. A semi-direct pitch to them as a class is unusual but interesting.
This is all very early in the game and Yang has never, AFAIK, polled above 1%. None of these wings necessarily have big numbers, and even 4 (the proposed East Asian racial wing) caps out at a few %.
TLDR: I see five Yang wings as of now:
— 1.) ex-MAGA machiavellian wing, who want to “destroy rather than build” with the hope conditions become more favorable for nationalism as a result of the Yang movement and/or (long shot) a Yang presidency;
— 2.) ex-MAGA nihilist wing, who really want to grab that ((($1000))). (One wonders what the dollar-value of Judas’ 40 pieces of silver was.) Conscious self-puppetization for cash. The tragedy of this is outlined in the Anon post to which this is a reply;
— 3.) Genuine, positive UBI supporters with no other overriding agenda for backing Yang but UBI; a mishmash of eccentrics and futurists of various types of the left, center, and right;
— 4.) A potentially emerging Chinese/EastAsian racial wing;
— 5.) A technocratic-elitist wing who see Yang as potentially ushering in a new era that favors them and will lead to a kind of hyper-efficient society which they would lead and which they would prefer.
Wings 1 & 2 are those who have given up on Blormpf, Kushner, and the Gang of Snake-Oil Conmen headed (at least nominally) by Master Conman Donald Blormpf. Wing 4 will have been anti-Trump from the beginning due to his problematic associations with American nationalism and Middle America Whites, whom Asians of immigrant stock are suspicious of (as is Andrew Yang himself). Wing 5 is hard to predict because of its predilection away from politicking.
Short answer: YES.
The longer you have to spend paying off your debt, the more interest they can pile onto that debt and thus maximize their take.
Also, Yang won’t have to be bought off by the plutocracy when he already is part of it.
No, I doubt he will deliver an UBI or any other monetary handouts for the masses once in office.
Rather its a clever little way of getting the greedy, lazy and useless mouths to vote for him as they are too blinded by the idea of getting a “free ride” through life to think critically.
Get angry all you want, call me stupid all you want.
Obama lied and betrayed his voters and Trump is rapidly following in his steps and I see no signs that Yang will be any different.
Finally I will share this thought.
One human will cost them a 1000 dollars once a month for life, a bullet will cost 5 dollars once.
Never forget, the elite talks a lot about the need to reduce the number of humans and preferely down to 500 million.
And we already know they have zero concerns about bombing, gassing and starving millions to death just to make a quick buck.
A simplistic answer. No doubt the high intermarriage rate helps East Asians assimilate, but the real reason why East Asians have not been targeted for violence is because they are by and large harmless. East Asian men are perceived as small and nerdy, not physically threatening. They are not power hungry, vengeful, manipulative and warmongering like the Jews; they are not violent criminals, rapists and welfare leeches like blacks and hispanics, and they do not subscribe to a hostile alien religion like Islam. In fact, many Koreans are protestants. Most East Asians just want to be upper middle class professionals like engineers and doctors, eat some good food, send their kids to Harvard and they’re happy. When push comes to shove, such a group would be easiest to pick off.
Trump loves Israel all his life. He was giving his money to build Israeli settlements since the 1970s.
It is reported his name is written in old town squares of Israeli settlements, where he gave his money to create them in the 1980s.
https://i.imgur.com/VDEY0Sy.jpg?1
Popularity of Trump in Israel is also easy to understand, aside from pro-Israel policies.
Trump has a colourful Middle Eastern personality.
Obama and Trump’s actual policy to Israel, was not so different. However, Israel loves Trump and hates Obama. Obama had something like 90% disapproval rating in Israel (which must include Israeli Arabs as well).
Obama seemed like a cold and feminine personality, which is not likely to be popular with Middle Eastern people (he was hated not only in Israel, but in actually in most Middle Eastern countries). Obama was very unpopular in Arab countries.
And Obama’s unpopularity in the Middle East, will be similar with a cold and feminine Chinese man like Yang.
Netanyahu’s election campaign this month in Israel is based on giant signs to market his relationship to Trump.
https://i.imgur.com/i8jcrYr.jpg
Trump was probably naturally attractive to Middle Eastern people, like some kind of golden talisman for them.
Trump vodka, has been one of the main, luxury kosher vodka brands in Israel for many years.
https://i.imgur.com/Yd7PvSr.jpg
And even slogans can be internationalized and understood by simple Middle Eastern people.
https://i.imgur.com/w2awUrB.jpg
https://www.instagram.com/p/BunYygEn3BG/
Putin will be for Russian tourists I guess? (although there is also something strange about the popularity of Putin with Middle Eastern people).
Ironically, I remember when Putin seemed popular in Russia (at least Russian media). But Obama destroyed that image very fast.
Trump’s surrender shows the only two options are sedation or acceleration – i see UBI (if it works as intended) as sedation rather than acceleration and if that’s what people want then go for it – i’m only arguing against those who see it as acceleration in itself (and even then it could probably be flipped into acceleration somehow).
Oops a mistake in my text. It should say. “I remember when Obama seemed popular in Russia at first months (at least Russian media). But Obama destroyed that relationship very fast.”
I don’t know if a moderator here can edit it?
Most of the jobs are not automated. America’s unemployment and homeless problems are largely caused by jobs being offshored or outsourced to foreigners like the Mexicans, Indians and Chinese, and Yang wants to bring more of them in.
Whites need to wake up. Yang is not their savior. He is the Satan who will hasten their demise.
Asians are targeted by blacks a lot
Continuing earlier discussion this week. I found turner in the factory which builds the MC-21 will have a salary of $230 per month (nominal salary).
By PPP conversion figure –
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP
So $230 nominal, is $622 per month when adjusted for price purchasing parity.
What is an equivalent American job, where low salary people work?
Cashier in Walmart?
https://www.careerbliss.com/walmart/salaries/cashier/
Around $1666 a month?
No-one in America needs “universal basic income” – even the lowest jobs, are high income, by an international view.
People should find what skills are demanded in the economy, and adapt to that, just people have to in any other country.
Unemployment rates will not increase “because of automation” (this is a silly journalist myth). All will happen is that the type of jobs and skills will change, as has already happened for the past two centuries in industrializing countries.
Also Americans complaining they will have to work for $11 an hour as a cleaner or something? Most people in the world would dream of that salary.
Its just a childish repackaging of government “welfare payments” from the government, with the idea of just greatly increasing them.
If you decide to greatly increase welfare payments, then sure, some people will choose to be unemployed and live on the welfare payments.
Funding for these unemployed people will simply by from the employed, or productive, part of the population, via the government taxation of (productive peoples’) income.
This would just be a good way for politicians to fuck the American economy and working population, with some mild socialism to non-working people. From geopolitical perspective, it could be an amusing experiment to see.
An intelligent country would use the same money to invest in education and labour mobility.
The $1000 UBI will allow debts to be paid down faster. No plutocrat want’s their debt instrument to be paid down, and hence they will lose this easy income.
Remember, when money cycles into a debt instrument, to pay down principle, the debt instrument disappears.
Hypothecation is a fancy word for debt instruments that spawn new bank credit. These sort of debt instruments come from nothing and disappear into nothing when the former credit returns to pay down principle.
This means that Yang’s UBI money will disappear along with gains that would have gone to Plutocrats, providing the former bank credit vectors into paying down principle. This paying down of principle is BOUND TO HAPPEN, with the $1000 injection per month.
The economy can then operate without debts siphoning off purchasing power; it can operate more in alignment with Say’s law. This means that producers are buying and selling from each other directly, without diversions from circular flow. The economy speeds up and becomes more efficient as it is not carrying dead weight rentiers.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/05/09/economic-truth-turn-michael-hudson/
Purchasing Power Parity is the better metric than “income.”
Most American’s have their income siphoned away with various taxes and hidden costs in prices. Hudson has calculated that only about 20% of the average income is left over to spend buying and selling services. There are statistics and damn statistics; it is damn statistics to just quote income as if all other factors are equal.
The American economy has been financialized as PCR discusses in link above.
@mal, @notanon
No. Central banks have not been paying for expanding government spending. The people have been. The rich do not benefit from QE except in the trivial sense that recessions hurt the rich more than the poor.
“at the limit if all the work is being done by robots there’s no consumers – obviously.”
No. The consumers are the people. The washing machine is a trivial illustration of this.
How about the economic literate people like me?
YOU HAVE TO INJECT INTO THE BASE OF THE POPULATION. Have to. How can I make it any clearer? You inject into citizens, to form families ideally, as family formation is the cornerstone.
There are TWO GAPS in the economy.
1) Gap due to debt money, where the debt instrument makes exponential claims on the real economy. The real economy produces outputs in a S curve, somewhat related to the seasons. The two do not match, and this polarizes ANY AND ALL civilizations leading to war. This is the verdict of history and reality. Communism is a false attempt to deal with this, but instead it creates a similar power pyramid to that of neo-liberal finance capitalism.
2) Gap in the price of goods produced and what is distributed to labor. In other words, prices of goods that emit from production system is higher than that paid to labor, so labor cannot buy their output. This is also reality and cannot be ignored.
Those who pass hypnosis about reality ((typically our friends)) do not want you to know this, and those of you who are against UBI are doing the bidding of your plutocratic masters. You are passing on hypnosis that you were programmed with since birth. Debts have to be paid down, or erased to create a level playing field.
There are few economists that will tell you the two things I just posted above, because in order to graduate from college, economists have to regurgitate falsehoods that don’t stand up to scrutiny.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D1klBnVUwAECbq8.jpg
Yeah but is he good at skateboarding?
you’re saying it might work
i agree
that’s why i’m against it
Thanks for civil replies.
Got that about poverty and feel there IS something there.
As for the rest (automation, paid work, meaningful jobs etc.) let’s agree to disagree and move on.
Yang’s UBI aims to keep potentially revolutionary middle and lower-class Whites pacified.
So, while boosting Yang’s candidacy might be good for some lulz, he is arguably a terrible choice if accelerationism is actually one’s goal, since the purpose of his free money is to protect the borderless multicultural Neolib tyranny he plans to enact from the disenfranchised Whites that would otherwise threaten it.
Of course, there’s plenty of other awful shit he’s in favor of. He’s actually a pretty dangerous character. He’s affable, much more far-seeing and nuanced than the others, a whole lot smarter– but just as poisonous.
Question, who are you voting for and why is their platform better than Yangs?
I don’t like a lot of this in the chart, but I think much of his more oddball policies will go nowhere. Obama was much more liberal than Yang on gun rights but our gun policy did not change under him.
QE is/was the central banks printing money to buy the banks’ gambling debts.
biggest robbery in history.
and an all-robot factory making washing machines is an illustration of my point.
Well, I want this pimple to pop as much as the next guy. But I don’t want to see America break up into different countries nor do I want to live through a brutal civil war. Don’t underestimate how ugly things can get.
I think UBI will not impede the collapse that is going to happen anyway nor do I think it will slow it down. But Indo think it will help keep America from breaking apart and will help prevent brutal shootings like in NZ.
I’ll be willing to eat crow if proved wrong, but most of this sounds like BS. In particular the first and last point.
No idea where the 5 million immigrants thing is from.
His actual positions on LGBT is the boilerplate Dem one: https://www.yang2020.com/policies/lgbtq-rights/
I agree that the Chinese are the worst threat. They’re not all HI-B techies doing important work Americans are too stupid to do
Their crowded households are a major reason rents are so high
Their businesses are in gross violation of every labor law and regulation but their political power is such that Chinese are free to exploit their indentured servants. $$50 for a hundred hour work week is the norm in Chinese American workshops.
The Asian Exclusion Acts lowered the cost of housing raised wages and prevented the spread of bubonic plague and leprosy in California.
The 1965 immigration act lowered wages raised housing prices increased corruption and brought back indentured servitude
Look at this. Most goyim are dumb putty in globo-homo Jewish-supremacist hands.
In Texas, a ‘red state’, parents take their little children to watch trannies and drag-queens twerk on the floor.
https://twitter.com/SavingAmerica4U/status/1107025800560283651
In America? And not Bernie?
British Pantomime has included Dames (Drag Queens) since the 19th C. Always considered fit for children.
Until say, the 1970’s most factories had Christmas “smokers” where amongst other lampooning someone would dress in drag. And political activists used to dress in drag (Rebeccites).
Not a new thing in the UK. I never liked it though.
So, are Yanggang the new Yangkees?
Dmitry, in the other thread, why did you state you think I am an American?
Abortion, abortion, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, abortion, blah, blah, blah, state within a state for posterity. Abortion, abortion, blah, blah, blah.
Creepy as elements that comprise the Left coalition are, I can always count on WN’s being on about a “solution” than simply cannot happen and abortion. There is not (and won’t be) a constituency for a separate identity state. Ever.
Abortion, to the extent that it impacts anyone’s life, is eugenic. Here is snipet from abort73, a pro-life org, playing the “abortion advocates are the real racists” angle to full effect:
“In 2016, approximately 2,538 human beings lost their lives to abortion each day in the United States.12 On average, 18% were Hispanic, 36% were black, and 38% were white.13 That translates to approximately 457 Hispanic children, 914 black children, and 964 white children. Though the white population in the U.S. outnumbers the black population five to one,14 abortion kills close to the same number of black children each day as it does white children. In fact, more members of the black community are killed by abortion each year in the United States than by all other causes combined”
Want to wind the clock back to 1973 and deal with these demographic implications?
The Puerto Rico thing seems to arguably be a mainstream Congressional viewpoint with bipartisan support. Oh, it is still completely insane, but I doubt there are any Democrats against it. Many Republicans also support it – it may be hard to find any against it.
What actually seems to be the hold-up is the most recent ballot in 2017 was non-binding. In other words, it is mainly about formalism. They are technically supposed to have a majority too – one could make the case that means a high turnout, but I doubt if anybody in Congress would see that as an objection. And if it was a binding vote, there’d be a lot of money thrown into it to increase turnout.
A lot of territories had to try a few times before they became states. My prediction: PR will become a state. And I think there is a lot of symbolic value in that outcome, at least in the sense of future history books about the decline and fall of America. Hopefully, if it happens, the flag will also change.
I genuinely hope for either a shock “I Will Not Run” announcement from Trump (I like to refer to him now as Blormpf to symbolize his metamorphosis into something almost-unrecognizably-ugly) setting up an open R-team primary season. Absent that, any serious challenger-from-the-right in the 2020 R primary season.
Someone morally serious. The current president never was, but conned millions, or billions globally speaking, I guess. Guinness book of records: Most people on Earth conned in a political campaign. Winner: Donald J. Blormpf…
The latter, they will tell you, is a very long shot to actually win — but it’s the only position I can take in good conscience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dKpHtc9F9M
Trump is obviously going to win the Republican primary.
So what better choice do we have?
“I have argued that technological developments will soon make gun control near inevitable.”
Shoot AK you could just as easily argue that technological developments will one day make gun control impossible.
One might wonder how much of that violence is due to environmental as opposed to genetic factors, though. I mean, Russians were an extremely violent bunch in the 1990s and early 2000s, but they’ve since mellowed a lot due to the end of the alcoholism epidemic in Russia (and also presumably due to the improved living standards in Russia).
Anatoly, do you think that the creation of an unconditional basic income–at least if it is made sufficiently large over time–will result in unwilling parents eventually being given an opt-out of paying child support?
Learn the difference between acknowledging a source of political strength and praise brainlet, same for the difference between seeing the tactical vulnerabilities of a competitor and criticism.
e.g. “Satan’s ability to prey upon human weakness and vice is the source of his earthly power,” = not praise.
UBI would be a good way to lessen the effcts of mass immigration. In fact ironically that is one of Bryan Caplan’s plans is to tax guest workers at a higher rate and use the money to pay people who are negatively affected.
Go ahead and enjoy those invisible chains of debt slavery. Don’t make the rest of us become party to your Stockholm Syndrome.
i can’t believe anatoly gave me a serious mathematical answer. this UBI stuff is total horseshit and anatoly knows it. or does he?
where will the money come from?
from everybody posting here. from all the people making yang gang memes. from all the productive europeans in america.
you think by voting for yang you’re going to get a free 1000 dollars a month?
you’re going to get 1000 dollars a month TAX INCREASE, MORON.
the deadweight, do nothing, unproductive third worlders in america will all get 1000 dollars a month. but not you. you’ll be PAYING them 1000 dollars a month from your paycheck.
and once they get it, they’ll vote to raise it. is social security sustainable? is medicare sustainable? no? and yet, on it goes. heading towards financial oblivion. the most politically lethal policy in history. big time entitlement money. once it’s in effect, it’s set in stone. and the useless masses will come to the US by the hundred million, to get their free 1000 dollars a month. you think the border situation is bad now? wait until you UBI morons get what you want.
it’s MIND BOGGLING anatoly actually took time to try to justify it mathematically. he should know better how this stuff is going to go.
most intellectually offensive was his idea that other welfare systems would go away. HA. HAHA. HAHAHAHAHA. when has that EVER happened in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD?!
My debt is actually shrinking not growing because I am paying installments. Debt=Principal + Interest or D=P+I. The interest I is what it is. It is not growing. It is fixed and determined at the time when you take a loan. It will only grow if you miss installments but otherwise it is a fixed value. And thus the interest I can be considered as a fixed fee for a loan just like in Islamic banking. Debt will grow only if more loans are taken or if the old loans are overdue. The latter could be fixed with a simple legislation that beyond some time period the interest I part can’t be recalculate to a higher value. The debt will grow at an exponential rate only if people take new loans at an exponential rate but it just as well can be at a linear rate or at a logarithmic rate.
“An argument based on queasy misgivings isn’t going to work against UBI. And Yang already has an answer for this: there is no inflation. We’ve had bailouts, QE and NIRP predicated on deflationary fears. We’ve given billions to banks and too big to fail. So if free money is good for the rich, why isn’t it good for the rest of us?”
that’s not what happened at all. the velocity of money was really low. so the ultra rich got extra billions from QE, but it was all just locked up in their vault, barely moving. there’s only so much they can spend. the ultra rich captured most of the gains from the last two jewish federal reserve chairs. the average guy got nothing. google velocity of money, maybe you’ll learn something.
whereas with (completely, totally insane) UBI, you bet your ass that core inflation will skyrocket. or don’t you understand how federal stafford loans work and why the cost of college tuition has skyrocketed? aside from other stuff which they deliberately ignore in core CPI. like the cost of healthcare. or food. or rent. or the price of houses. there’s no inflation, unless you’re alive and breathing and eating food.
that is all beside the point though. the inflation argument is one of the least important things here. it’s a side show. compared to the CIVILIZATION breaking effect of giving every third worlder on earth a free 1000 dollars at my labor expense. which is absolutely, positively how every democrat president after trump would use it. because trump will be the last republican president.
the idea that any UBI policies will be instituted ‘correctly’ is batshit insane, and that you guys keep arguing that they will be, shows how extremely not real world you are at all. this is stuff is pure horsehit. democrats will make sure a hundred million brown people who just landed on the shore will get this 1000 bucks a month simply for breathing air. if you think otherwise, you don’t know jack shit about anything.
MEFOBILLS ideas about UBI mostly being a free lunch are nonsense. he’ll find that out when 1 billion brown people show up for their handout. which they’ll then vote to increase.
other dumb ideas: 12,000 a year is not enough to live on, so freeloaders won’t freeload. why do you guys think mexicans live 5 people to an apartment and drive hunk of shit 800 dollar beater cars and don’t pay for car insurance or health insurance either for that matter? third worlders will get along just fine on 12 grand a year in the US. but you guys won’t.
my mistake that i took you futurist guys moderately seriously, it’s plain as day you have no idea whatsoever what you’re talking about on a lot of stuff. herp derp. robots and AI = free money for a billion third worlders, the money will rain from the sky, or grow from trees at least. UBI is no can defense, daniel-san. crane kick johnny in all valley karate tournament. UBI is a lot like the crane kick in the karate kid. the most preposterous idea ever. stand on one leg not moving in a fist fight.
probably the stupidest idea (it’s hard to say which with any precision, because every aspect of UBI is THE stupidest idea in the history of the world) is that poor people will do something productive with the money. or, that there will be a golden age of human capital, where people are ‘unleashed’ from 9 to 5 jobs, to go create new and wondrous things. that’s not what’s going to happen AT ALL. 99% of humans have ZERO good ideas about ANYTHING.
“seeing the tactical vulnerabilities of a competitor”
I think that’s part of your underlying problem. Everyone not you/your group is a competitor. When they have you by the throat, you curse them. When they’re vulnerable, you mock them. You have no friends based on common humanity and goodwill.
That would depend on how many simply stop working for a pay check. If everyone except the government parasites quit their job and collected UBI, the system would reset in months. If only unskilled non-taxpaying workers quit and collected UBI then the system could stumble on far longer.
“UBI (if it works as intended) as sedation rather than acceleration”
UBI is slop for the masses to keep them from revolting. It maintains the status of the elites. In that sense, it’s a disingenuous ploy.
“the velocity of money was really low. so the ultra rich got extra billions from QE, but it was all just locked up in their vault, barely moving. there’s only so much they can spend. the ultra rich captured most of the gains from the last two jewish federal reserve chairs. the average guy got nothing. google velocity of money, maybe you’ll learn something.”
What does this have to do with anything? The bottom line is that the “ultra rich captured most of the gains”. The fact that the velocity of money was low is not a defense for inequity and wealth inequality.
“whereas with (completely, totally insane) UBI, you bet your ass that core inflation will skyrocket.”
This is a bankers’ argument: we get free money because it’s not inflationary; you can’t because it is. This is neither logically nor morally convincing for the average unemployed man/woman. Defending socialism only for the rich is not morally/rationally tenable.
“compared to the CIVILIZATION breaking effect of giving every third worlder on earth a free 1000 dollars at my labor expense.”
According to Yang, it’s not at your expense. In theory, it will come at the expense of tech giants, robotics and AI.
Whether this is really true or not, it’s a very appealing idea for the dwindling middle class hurt by automation and off-shoring.
“the idea that any UBI policies will be instituted ‘correctly’ is batshit insane, and that you guys keep arguing that they will be, shows how extremely not real world you are at all.”
This is a valid argument but not an economic argument that will carry much water with the masses.
“my mistake that i took you futurist guys moderately seriously, it’s plain as day you have no idea whatsoever what you’re talking about on a lot of stuff.”
“Futurists” seem to cohere to the narrative that the current jobs malaise is caused by automation, technology and robotics. Their prescription is free money as robots/AI make “work” obsolete.
Assuming this is true, what’s the alternative prescription?
If this narrative is not true, then what is the alternative narrative that will resonate with the middle class?
“that poor people will do something productive with the money. or, that there will be a golden age of human capital, where people are ‘unleashed’ from 9 to 5 jobs, to go create new and wondrous things. that’s not what’s going to happen AT ALL. 99% of humans have ZERO good ideas about ANYTHING.”
Technologists tell us that AI and robotics are coming. It’s going to destroy thousands of jobs. You say no.
Yet people see Amazon destroying retail jobs. Technology is making many kinds of jobs obsolete and promises to continue destroying jobs. People see it all around them. But you say no.
UBI isn’t meant to serve as welfare (money for the poor). It’s meant to supplement income for the middle class. It’s meant to capture wealth created by robotics/ai/technology currently being funneled to tech billionaires.
I support welfare for the poor. But I don’t support UBI for the middle class. However, the arguments against UBI so far is very unconvincing. And if this is all you got on a debate stage with Yang, you’re going to lose.
You have no idea how economy works do you?
The billions given to the banks were not locked up in their vaults. The billions were spent taking out massive new loans to turn the red deficits into a big surplus. It’s how the bankers could give themselves record high bonus payout doing the 2008 crisis.
By sinking the banks into a massive debt hole, they turned red numbers into black numbers and thus the banks went from having no cash in the vault to having tons of loaned money that counted as income through the magic of modern economy when it became time to count the years profits.
Its why QE continued for so long, the original debt in the banks is being covered up by more and more debt until it becomes so impossible to keep the scam going that there is nothing more to be done about it.
At that point we all get, pardon my french. “fucked up beyond all expectations.”
At source, all money comes into being at hypothecation. OK, it is 97% plus, with coins issued into money supply at seigniorage, and no debt.
The debt instrument claims its credit at an exponential rate. A 30 year house note claims multiples of principle.
In order to erase debts, creditors will take the house and put you out on the street. This is what happened in 2008, and no amount of hand waving about your personal anecdotes change this fact.
Debt instruments will go even more exponential, when they are refinanced, and the interest from the first bond, becomes absorbed in the second bond. Greece anyone?
Yang intends on using a VAT tax. This tax should capture the value added by robots, which is why Yang is proposing it.
Good economics require taxes on rents and unearned income, something like taxing a tumor to make it shrink. But, taxing rents and unearned income is beyond the scope of sound bites needed to become elected as President.
A free lunch is made when prices are pushed beyond their true cost value. This has nothing at all to do with a UBI.
For example, monopoly pricing or grabbing the commons, or privatizing what the public sector can deliver at lowest prices, are part of the free lunch.
A UBI is something like flow or channeling. It is taking the productivity of robots and the production system, and then redirecting it to consumers, who will absorb that production.
Money is demand, and putting demand in the hands of consumers will allow the production system to produce.
Do a thought experiment: If all goods and services are made by robots, then human labor is cut out of the economic equation and hence is not getting money to buy the robotic output. The world then polarizes into the 1% who own the means of production, and on the other side are have nots.
Also, why would you immigrate millions of squatamallans, just to give them $1000/month, so they can squat. Basic human psychology will take over, and people will finally start admitting we don’t need any more unskilled labor, to compete against robots. Even most farm labor will be done by robots in future, and this future is coming at us much faster than most people are willing to admit.
Yes democraps and leftists want new brown voters. To keep their vote, it is GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS and transfers to keep the brownies on the plantation.
A UBI goes to everybody and thus is not a specific calling out – to come on over to the democraps- maneuver, so we can stay in power by getting your vote. Like Alaska’s distributed oil wealth money, the UBI will be both Republican and Democrat, it will be American and beyond politics.
It is a necessary economic corrective, and it was actually conservative economists who first came up with the idea.
From The Organic Prepper
https://www.theorganicprepper.com/social-credit-system-coming-to-america
Social Media, Universal Basic Income, and Cashless Society: How China’s Social Credit System Is Coming To America
Take a Chinese type social credit system,
Combine it with a cashless society, add
Universal basic income and you have a
Complete governmental control system in place
LoL.
So…tell us all how that Alaska oil money redistribution is working out? Alaska is becoming Chinese style Social Credit, to control their population?
A redistribution of UBI is devoid of strings, and hence is the opposite of “control.” Further, economic freedom is a precondition for political freedom.
Are the citizens of Alaska more free or less free than other American’s?
Well we can be friends when you’re not trying to take the food off my table and wreck my community, friendship based on “common humanity” is the garbage concept of a cuckold. Newflash: every asshole/criminal/politician there ever was was also a human, but I don’t want to be their friends.
I’ve got nothing against foreigners in their own societies choosing to live as they wish, but foreigners who pursue their own interest at my expense in mine have a problem with me. Pretending that foreigners will treat you with “goodwill” when they have power over you is naive and moronic, different ethnic/identity groups in your society should be treated as competitors because they explicitly are, hence why they form a separate group.
Another peddler with an exotic name pushing for a man who doesn’t belong in the majority White-Christian and Europe centric country’s primary for the ’20 presidential election… what the nation needs is someone from where the first forty presidents came and America will be great again!
Any kind of VAT tax will always hit the poor much harder than the rich as poor people spend all of the money they earn in a year and rich people spend less, depending on how rich they are.
Suppose you added a VAT of 7% to most goods and services, that would mean the poor would be paying an extra 7% on all their income; which they can ill afford. But the richer tax payers would only be paying that 7% tax on the money they spent in a year. Suppose a millionaire only spends 50% of his income in a year. He will only pay the VAT on 50% percent of his income, meaning he will pay only 3.5% yearly of his income on VAT. The richer they are the less they pay, broadly speaking.
That is straight out ‘tax the poor to benefit the rich’ and as mentioned by a commenter above it is extremely regressive. It is like saying to the upper class, ‘We are going to give you an extra tax break if you vote for us. Don’t worry, we’ll make it up by taxing the poor and the working class more.’
If ordinary working people understood this they would never vote for any party which even whispered the words, ‘sales tax.’
It all adds up, the government will intentional crash the monetary system,
Causing millions of people to have no income, the government gives
Out UBI, gets the population on a cashless basics, using social credit scores to
Regulate behavior.
The elites needs this system in place to further their population replacement plans
Any criticism of migrants such as is now occurring in the UK and Sweden, on any
Social media platform will cause one to lose access to UBI. It is a perfect social
Control mechanism.
This system is in the testing stages in the Scandinavian countries. It is highly advanced in the UK and Canada and now apparently in New Zealand.
Literally trying to project the effects of a small scale experiment in a (literal geographic and political) backwater onto the premier world power is just inane. Imagine you went back in time sixty years, and now apply that logic to immigration.
“[Rinky-dink country X] has loosened immigration controls, and their demographics haven’t been massively affected have they?” and then think about how that worked out for the western world.
The presumption that if UBI is passed that immigration will be slashed and that immigrants won’t be immediately eligible, and that it will genuinely be apolitically disitributed is honestly insane, I don’t know what Karlin is thinking. Why is it that someone who so desperately wants to play the role of the cynical pragmatic political observer always so naively projects rational politics and sanity onto the crew of lunatics that control US legislation?
In a country with fairly high sales taxes what happens is anybody and everybody who can will make sales and service taxable deals go under the table. And they love it because it is no longer declared as income either. Be careful what you ask for.
That Alaska program is not a good example of UBI, should be compared to a dividend.
You think Asian immigrants are taking food off your table? I suggest you look to Washington and the bureaucrats who run that town and Wall St.
That sounds pretty innocent and benign. But you forgot to tell us that YOUR PEOPLE are in their lands, bombing, murdering and displacing.
Stop doing THAT and then maybe we can honestly talk about sovereign rights.
How has the last 10 worked out for you? So you see, that’s not the answer either.
The UBI is a dividend of the production system in the same way that oil, which comes from the ground, is a dividend of the earth.
Earth + Labor + Machines = Goods. Goods become Prices. Prices fetch money.
Now you know more economics than most economist Phd’s.
Now, lets take Labor out of the equation and replace it with smart machines:
Earth + Smart Machines = Goods. Goods become prices. PRICES not longer fetch money to be thrown back at labor through the production system.
Instead prices redound to smart machines, which convert the earth to make goods. Actually, the ultimate vector of prices will point at owners of Capital and Land, who then make smart machines, to continue the ownership of land and capital. Land and Capital become enclosed, and you are not a member of this enclosure.
This is a recipe for a new feudalism.
Is it a tenable situation for 1% to own all the means of production? Is UBI the solution to that problem?
I’m not familiar with the Alaska “oil dividend” program, but I presume that money comes from Alaska’s ownership of oil? Hence, it’s a dividend emerging from the PUBLIC’S COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP of the state’s NATURAL RESOURCES?
Is that in any way comparable to TECHNOLOGY/AI/robotics? Can we as citizens claim ownership to technologies and innovation pioneered by private individuals?
Here’s a thought experiment: Let’s say it’s the 17th century and 1% of the population owned 99.99% of the arable land. Is UBI the solution to this problem?
LoL You think governments control the money system? Corporate bank credit runs the world, and they networked their ledgers after Federal Reserve Act.
The cash in your wallet does not say U.S. Dollar on it anywhere – it is a note, which in turn was spawned when you signed a debt instrument.
Creditor is always over debtor, and governments are subordinated to their banking creditors. Central banks are also not top of money pyramid, it is the private banking system, which pushed these central banks into existence by hook and crook. The FED provides reserves POST FACTO to banking system, up to 48 hours after a new loan is made. (Providing a private bank cannot find reserves on the overnight market.)
A UBI will be something that private banking creditors DO NOT WANT. Expect our Jewish usurious friends to fight against it tooth and nail.
It is only a slight step to deficit spend and create new public credit, to then vector into UBI, to then pay off private debts. Private debt’s being paid off then allow the economy to behave more in alignment with Say’s law, where people buy and sell from each other without parasitic rentier overhead burdens.
Here’s a thought experiment: Let’s say it’s the 17th century and 1% of the population owned 99.99% of the arable land. Is UBI the solution to this problem?
Marx’s third volume “capital” discusses Euthansia of the rentier, where he was optimistic that capitalism would eventually displace rentiers from their land enclosure.
Rentiers are people who were siphoning wealth away from the industrial revolution. The would charge higher rents for tenants on their lands every-time that production improved value.
In Germany they had incorporated “industrial capitalism” where state credit, issued from state banks, vectored into industry.
The Kaiser then spent this productivity value increase on improving the lot of labor, through improved health and education and better housing, etc.
The same thing happened in America with Industrial Capitalism of Henry Clay and Peshine Smith.
Industrial Capitalism LOST in WW2 to Finance Capitalism as it emanated from England. The people who would enclose the land to take rents, will make excuses to take the land and own robots in future.
Think of the Kaisers spending of public money into the commons, as a form of UBI, a redistribution of the production system.
The U.S. actually got rich behind tariff walls, and spending state credit into the commons, to then lower prices to their lowest cost value. This is why American’s became so productive. We’ve lost the history of Peshine Smith and the American System, and have adopted Britain’s Jewish finance capitalist system, and hence most American’s are brainwashed and don’t even know our own history.
Finance Capitalism is pushing back, to enclose the lands again, and it is quite obvious to anybody with eyes, that a new Plutocracy has arisen.
Counting backwards, Nixon was the first of the last ten and notwithstanding his personal animosity to Jews he had surrounded himself with, he was in reality a puppet of the likes of Bebe Rebozo and the henchman, Henry Kissinger. And then apart from the Christian-eccentric, peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia, who maneuvered very cleverly separation of the Sainai Peninsula from the Zionist outpost for the benefit of Muslims and thus hated by them, every last one of them has been a slave to their private financial interest and thus has been very useless, especially, the last four. So, I guess it hasn’t worked out well!
From Andrew Yang’s site:
‘The Freedom Dividend,’ of $1,000/month, $12,000 a year for every American adult over the age of 18. This is independent of one’s work status or any other factor.’
Bogus. You want to give EVERYBODY an extra thousand a month? George Soros, Bill Gates, Donald Trump? All the people making over say 150k a year all ready? They don’t need it but the point, for Andrew, is that they will vote for it.
I can see giving it to the poor who need it but giving it to the rich who don’t is simple vote buying. It is like handing every American an IOU which he never intends to pay on the premise that ‘you never give a sucker an even break.’
The rest of his platform is also full of wispy pink cotton candy and solutions he never bothers to explain in detail because he has no intention of delivering.
You are being sold a bill of goods. Americans never learn that it is the system of government which shapes the future and if you don’t change that nothing else will ever change.
Try Tulsi Gabbard, at least she will keep you out of the upcoming war with Venezuela = Vietnam.
,
1% owning all the land is untenable. UBI is a redistribution reducing the headlock on labor.
When you are born into the world, the earth was a free gift of nature, or natures god.
For other humans, who came before you, to enclose the earth and claim it as “theirs,” is an abomination of logic, and further will collapse civilization.
Rome collapsed because a plutocracy of creditors arose and polarized their civilization. Latifundia was the enclosure of lands; a feudal system, where workers on the land gave a tithe of their production to their masters.
Think of the Dark Ages as the greatest depression. This depression was over after the fourth crusades, when Byzantium was sacked. Gold consecrated to the Temples, then went into circulation, and the “greatest” depression was over.
Spain, after discovery of metal money in the America’s had inflation, especially in silver. Land’s become un-enclosed in this kind of scenario.
England became enclosed when the Norman Kings invaded, as the Norman’s kept the lands for their off-spring. The Norman’s also brought Jews along with them to serve as tax collectors.
Follow it out to its logical conclusion. To do a means test for distribution is to create a bureaucracy, and said bureaucracy will have money power to then control.
The rich will automatically come under social opprobrium, and will be virtue signaling how they gave their $1000/month away.
The downsides of creating means testing bureaucracy implies it will be politicized.
Is the Alaska redistribution politicized?
right
so when they turn round and support it you’ll accept you’re wrong?
welfare was originally designed as a safety net for the poor but it has been turned into a way for the elites to offload part of their wage bill onto the tax payer.
the massive labor surplus they have engineered (which has kept wages down) wouldn’t be possible without food stamps etc.
UBI is that kind of welfare.
(unnecessary military spending is another example of that kind of welfare)
So it would seem that it might be helpful to have real MAGA patriots in office, not MIGA patriots and establishment/corporate/MIC/Wall St. pigs.
UBI is philosophically different from welfare. UBI is not supposed to be a safety net but a “dividend” payment courtesy of “technology”. It’s supposed to be the answer to, “What do we do when robots take over and make human labor unnecessary?”
If 1% owning all the land is unacceptable, then UBI cannot be the answer because it doesn’t cure the original problem. UBI serves as a relief valve to keep the masses from revolting and hanging billionaires/bureaucrats. UBI keeps the system going. UBI maintains the status quo of the haves and have nots.
right but anyone genuinely concerned with that future would support a complete moratorium on mass immigration – at the very least of unskilled labor.
But Germany was a fascist state. Do we want to live in a similar kind of political and economic system? And if we did live in such a system, income equality would be a moot point. And the owners of capital would be the state.
I don’t think Germany redistributed wealth, did they? They allocated capital to industry. That’s not UBI.
UBI accepts the current UNEQUAL system of haves and have nots. It keeps the billionaires in place. Its narrative is that inequality is NORMAL and robotics/AI makes some people very rich and most people very poor. And thus the sop they offer the discontented hoi polloi is UBI.
I believe this is unacceptable. UBI is very very flawed. However, unless people come up with compelling reasons against it and offer compelling alternatives to the current UNEQUAL system, UBI will continue to gain fans.
But that’s a separate topic from UBI and the displacement of labor by robotics/AI. And a moratorium on immigration will not stop the march of technology. However, I agree that there needs to be a moratorium.
Once again, your statement that debts grow exponentially was incorrect. You are mixing notions not realizing it. That the interest part of the debt is calculated with a formula that is an exponential function of time has nothing to do with how fast the debts grow. Debts may grow as a linear function or even slower or not at all.
It looks like you have been victimized by reading few one sided books like that of the Trotskyist Hudson.
automation -> over supply of labor
mass immigration -> over supply of labor
so talking about one and not the other = scam imo
i’d be fine with UBI paired with a complete halt in immigration.
Private banks business model is to create debt instruments. When you walk into a bank and ask for a loan, you are hypothecating yourself.
New bank credit pops into being at the moment (or soon thereafter) of signing said debt note. The bankers ledger now has an asset (the debt instrument) and a liability (the credit/dollars) it creates.
Your ledger is a mirror, where your asset is the new bank notes/credit, and liability is the debt instrument.
Now think on this very carefully. People are given $1000/month, and this money then vectors into paying down the bank-note. You are given an asset (the $1000/month) which goes on to pay off the debt claims held by the banker.
The debt instrument, when it is paid off, NO LONGER ACCRUES INTEREST, and therefore short circuits the bank’s business model.
It simple, I won’t have to admit I’m wrong, because I just described exactly how double entry bank mechanics work.
The interest rate curve is an exponential. It is a doubling over time.
The rule of 72 describes the doubling.
http://moneychimp.com/features/rule72.htm
Go to the calculator and do the math yourself.
Plot on a graph a doubling and a doubling and a doubling, and pretty soon it becomes asymptotic. OK? Debt instruments have at their core, a math function that makes demands outside of nature.
This site does the maaf for you:
https://www.live-counter.com/compound-interest/
Is Russia fascist, and they direct spend into houshold’s to improve fertility.
Is Hungary fascist, as they direct spend into households to improve fertilty.
Was Canada fascist from 1938-1974 when they had a sovereign economy, and direct spent into households.
Is the U.S. fascist for using earned income credits, which are a form of transfer spending?
DONT USE THE WORD FASCISM TO DEFLECT FROM REALITY.
When the Kaiser ran Germany, it was not Fascist.
This comment to hail @ March 16, 2019 at 10:58 pm GMT • 300 Word by me describes the two gaps in the economy. Scroll up on this thread.
Unless these two gaps are overcome, then you are correct, the Status Quo continues.
UBI is not a panacea, but only one policy tool to return some of the thefts back to the source.
Note also that UBI does not tax away rents and unearned income. VAT only captures some of the robot production, but will also capture human outputs.
And people who think we should have unlimited immigration, legal or otherwise, have their head up inside where the sun doesn’t shine.
This could be meme of the year:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D13mnRmWsAE7KU-.jpg
usury is parasitic
So, why are you arguing with me?
The UBI vectors into your debt instrument, thus releasing you from debt (if you choose to pay your debts.) In this way, the bank does not take usury on you as your burden is paid off.
In the first cycles of the loan, it is almost all interest payment.
So, the interest curve is against you at the beginning of the note. You are also paying first seigniorage to the banker, so it is even more usurious than at first blush.
Also, consider that bankster only had to do some keyboard entries for this easy living. They also socialize their losses onto the taxpayer. Remember TARP?
because their business model is parasitic they eventually reach a point where they need a debt jubilee (or some equivalent or temporary alternative) so although your general point about them not wanting debt paid down is correct it doesn’t necessarily apply in the end phase – if the alternative to it not being paid down is worse.
“Once we realize that government doesn’t work, we will stop dreaming that this or that social problem can be solved by passing a law — or by creating a new government program — or by electing someone who will make Washington more efficient or … ”
That is brilliant! It comes close the old Marshall McLuhan proverb: ” The medium is the message.”
Which could be re-defined today as: Facebook, youtube, google search et al are the matrix we live in. From which we might draw the conclusion that if we don’t change the paradigm we are … what’s that word? Intellectually handicapped. But wait! There is hope!
A little bit of food coloring, a little bit of botox, a couple of huge grapefruits strapped to your chest and even you worthless white intellectuals can join the Affirmative Action parade.
Of course you will have to take anti-nausea pills before you look in the mirror but no plan is perfect.
Allah Akbar and God save the little children!
Oh sorry, I thought you said you were American or living there.
No, I was deliberating about proof for Utu and AaronB’s identities, although as Reiner Tor pointed out, it is perhaps a bit of pointless exercise.
“These are of course fanciful scenarios, and unlikely ones.”
How’s this for a fanciful scenario: Putin basically doesn’t want to go to war with anybody – unlike the American government which seems to want to go to war with anybody they can exploit for profit, irregardless of casualties, both physical and (insofar as humanity is capable) intellectual.
Putin is the better choice. Which is why he is far more popular in the world view than Trump.
Poll the world and see what you come up with. The Russians have been the same forever and the basic message from them is: ‘We are not attacking you. So stop attacking us or there will be consequences .(and don’t underrate Russia for consequences because although they spend about 10% of what the US spends on defense they have nevertheless developed far more sophisticated offensive and defensive weapons against which America wouldn’t even stand a chance)
Go to any Russian site and see from the comments that your average Russian will not accept defeat from America or anybody else. Also see that they have absolutely no desire to conquer America. They are far more together about it than any ‘ethnic diversity’ government can ever be. Leave them alone and they will leave you alone. They; along with the only brave government in Europe (Hungary) don’t want to be overrun with ‘refugees’ of a different race and religion. Uriah Heep
“you’re going to get 1000 dollars a month TAX INCREASE, MORON.”
So the UBI and the tax increase cancel each other, i.e. no change. What is your problem??
Will he really appeal to black women in the American South?
… he wants to give them $1000 and he’s not white, so yes.
You can do a debt jubilee by making debt free money and then channeling it into debt instruments. If those particular instruments are tied to banks, i.e. created by banks, then that will be a jubilee.
The “dollar” created by Treasury will vector into the debt instrument and both will vanish. In this way it is not inflationary, the two get together and self annihilate. Debt instruments and their credit spawned at birth, and they vanish at death.
If you were listening earlier when I wrote it is only a small step to deficit spend into UBI, then that effectively is a quasi debt jubilee, and undoubtedly will cross people’s minds in future. VAT is only recycling, I’m talking about a twist to the funding for UBI.
For example, a new TBill is issued after debt ceiling is raised. This TBill is monetized by FED (yes TBTF banks have special vehicles for sweeping the TBill into reserves, and from there it is bought by FED’s keyboard issuance.) The Treasury then has new dollars to spend into UBI. Ideally they would stipulate it channels for debt payment, but we don’t live in a perfect world. Some of UBI will go on to pay off debts, forming a jubilee.
The public debt ceiling was raised, and new Tbill is now held on FED ledger forever. Interest is rebated to Treasury … which is how operations are now. Public debts to yourself don’t matter. (Public debts to another country do matter.)
In effect, public debts to yourself, which don’t matter are raised – and private debts (which do matter) are erased.
Don’t get mad at me, I didn’t invent the debt money system, it began mostly when Bank of England came into being in 1694. But, there are ways to trick it, and without a debt jubilee, then society will continue to polarize.
Already, a UBI does prevent some of this polarization due to the gaps I mention earlier.
It is not good to be against something because it is only a half loaf, when the alternative is no loaf.
Brilliant reply.
Nobody knows if overall taxes will go up. Why make claims that cannot be verified, it is just making noise.
We do know that Yang wants a VAT, and a VAT is harder to cheat on than income taxes. Plus it will capture robotic outputs, which are not captured today under income taxes. Income taxes will go away.
It may be that for a large segment of the population taxes will actually go down.
When Nazi Germany issued MefoBills, Tax roles increased almost 3x. From 33 to 38 tax roles increased because new money entered German economy and stimulated it to higher productivity, and then this new money was taxed out to prevent inflation. Nazi Germany had no great depression, and they were building homes and highways.
I know, some of you will react emotionally to the word “Nazi” because you have been conditioned to do so, but think critically please instead of emotionally.
Additionally, they gave out loans to families that had children, and I believe if you had four children then said loan would be cancelled, something like what Hungary is trying to do today.
There are many things a country can do if it has sovereign control over its money, and UBI is only one tool.
Wait, they are testing it in my country, why didn’t anyone tell me about this?
Again Denmark and its aggressive anti-immigration politics gets ignored by a clueless keyboard warrior.
So you don’t.
Enjoy your 1000 dollars or what is left of it once you get done paying vat on basic things like food and water, right after the supermarkets get done paying vat on the same things, and the farmer get done paying vat on the stuff he needs to grow your food and so on.
—
Debt to a company is income for them, sure, its not in their pocket or bank account but corporations can write up costumer debt as income, plus with debt, they get to charge interest on the interest which increases their actual take.
If you borrow a 100 dollars to buy something and agree to pay back your loan in 10 dollar bits with an interest of 2 percent per month, you will in effect end up paying more for your product. And the longer the company can keep you paying off your debt the bigger their end profits are, so it is in their interest to keep you in debt for as long as they can since they can just confiscate your purchased product if you fail to pay off your loan.
Metropolis
Amon,
You are having cognitive dissonance.
Debts come in two types mostly. If a company issues a debt instrument, then it is asking for money out of the existing money supply, and the holder of the debt note will receive more money later, presumably out of the companies higher productivity.
The other type of debt instrument is a hypothecation. This type of debt creates new credit. The holder of this instrument is typically finance, and it vectors into wall street. For example, house mortgages that were on-sold to TBTF banks, and then were tranched into MBS’s.
This is your statement:
Debt to a company is income for them, sure, its not in their pocket or bank account but corporations can write up costumer debt as income, plus with debt, they get to charge interest on the interest which increases their actual take.
A company can issue a debt bond into the secondary market and it attracts money from investors, who are then paid back in future, presumably with interest. That is not unreasonable, as there is a loss of wants, and the holder had to risk their savings.
Here is another debt mechanism that is called green mail: A hedge fund creates new credit at one of their tied banks, this credit comes into being by attaching a companies pension funds, physical assets, patents, etc., to double entry ledger. This is done even though the hedge fund doesn’t own the company yet. Bank issues new credit based on hedge fund mechanics. Then hedge fund threatens to buy target company and starts buying stock. Either way hedge fun wins, they sell off acquired stock later at bid up price, or if they finally get control of company, they grab pension fund and then tell company employees too bad so sad, your pensions are gone. Or, you have to move your company to China.
I think you are confused on debt mechanics, and which type is usurious and which type is not.
Benjamin Franklin’s State Bank system issued new additional money into money supply, so the interest on loans the bank gave out could be paid back. This additional money was spent/channeled into improving the commons, on bridges and ports, so it was a Virtuous Cycle, yet there was interest paid on the loans. The loans were held to 8 years, so interest curve did not go exponential.
The UBI is not welfare. It’s a citizen’s dividend. The whole point of UBI is to bypass the welfare state entirely, and/or even to diminish or eliminate it entirely. Thomas Paine supported a version of UBI, and Richard Nixon, the last founding stock president, tried to implement a UBI.
The notion that whites are like blacks and would respond like them to UBI is bizarre coming from racialists and HBD advocates who spend most of their time emphasizing racial differences, and reflects the contempt they have for ordinary people. Meanwhile, they’re hanging their hopes on defeating naturally appealing concrete proposals like UBI through vague cultural appeals and some chance at vicarious success and glory. It’s like trying to defeat concrete populism with royalism.
What about using a Georgist style land value tax (LVT) to fund the UBI? I think a VAT funded UBI is better than nothing, but wouldn’t an LVT funded UBI be even better? This would prevent concentration of land rent into rentiers and distribute it to productive labor and enterprise, which create the land rent.
You still do not get it, do you? It is not about how you calculate interest. Debt=P+I. How you calculate I is irrelevant. When stated that debts grow exponentially you mixed two notions: that of the debt and that of how you calculate interest. The debt will grow exponentially only if the borrowing happen at exponential rate but they do not have to. Debts can grow as a linear function or logarithmic function or they can decrease and how the interest is calculated has nothing to do with it.
Did not know that. Will never happen because Congress, but I approve. Will also be called “dass rrrrracis!!!” It would literally have disparate impact against blacks and browns, btw.
Yeah but why wouldn’t I want the guy at least offering me a grand a month?
We can go ’round and ’round about how he’s lying but you’d just be offering certainty you can’t justify.
Come on people. Saying things that are at variance with observable reality is not cool.
Our (((friends))) at school of Salamanica proclaimed that all debts should be paid with interest. And this interest historically has been calculated using time. These sort of errors in thinking re-occur throughout history.
The longer the time of the loan, the more you owe back. The Catholic “Churchmen” realized this teaching was BS, but it is still with us today.
Just making the claim that you can POSSIBLY make a debt instrument that you pay back with less, or even the same amount OVER TIME, is against the thrust of history. You are dreaming and not in alignment with the real world.
Hudson’s book, “and forgive them their debts” show how debts can accrue even without interest. For example, tax arrears in the near middle east could not be paid when there was a crop failure. A debt was attached to new debtor to pay taxes, even though debtor had no control over the weather.
Debts ALWAYS make claims. The Creditor holds the debt instrument and makes claims on the real world. The claims are generally….always, greater than the ability of debtor to pay.
When you take out a note for a car (or a house) TODAY, the interest you pay up front does not draw down your principle, it passes through to the banker and lands on his ledger. He then spends it on payroll, and living the high life. Pretty good living for typing up a debt instrument and creating new credit.
Everybody on this thread that has taken out a car loan or a house loan, KNOWS that when they only start paying down the loan in earnest at end of the term. It is based on time. In the beginning of loan, it is all usury paid to debt holder (banker typically). A balloon mortgage is yet another way to calculate interest, and so on, but the creditor always wants their pound of flesh.
The $1000/month will go a long way toward helping the private economy release itself from the grip of private debts.
How interest is calculated is a very important function of the debt instrument. A builders loan has the interest coming at end of loan. This means that builder of a house is in a hurry to put up the house quickly, as he will be penalized with interest at the end (not the beginning) of loan term.
This means that most houses in the U.S. are crap, and have been thrown up quickly, to then be able to pay off builder loan without incurring interest penalty. Building crap homes means that American’s have to go to Home Depot to constantly repair what the builder didn’t do with his crappy squatamalan labor.
It’s all about the Benjamins, and groups of people trying to take rents and usury, and the closest thing to alchemy is typing up new debt instruments, to then create a class of debt slaves.
Those of you who are against receiving $1000/month are acting against your own interests and for plutocracy. Dupes.
Yes of course it would be better than VAT.
I’m having arguments on this thread where people think that debts are sacrosanct…. do you think they have the ability to understand rents and unearned income?
It is hard enough just getting them to think it is in their best interest to receive $1000/month.
Their brainwashing runs deep.
I’m encouraged that at least one person has a deep understanding of how taxes should work, and fiscal policy and monetary policy are flip sides of the same thing.
Also with 40% of US born Hispanics marrying/producing kids with whites, in places like California how many extended families have a Hispanic family member now?
Stay away from that loser Hunter Wallace. Here’s what he just wrote on his blog:
“I’d like to relax and be forgiven for the whole Charlottesville thing. … SJWs are just so … tiresome. Even under Catholicism you had forgiveness.”
Lol, loser. One giant cry me a river. He was warned in his own comments section to drop his dumb marching idea, but noooooo. He wanted WN 2.0. His entire website is now just a cuckfest begging forgiveness and shilling for a weird Asian guy who has precisely zero chance of getting the democratic nomination, not with all those blacks voting Harris/Biden and SWPL types voting Bernie; the media has also started to take notice of the guy, so you can expect them to editorialize lots of damaging “alt-right” associations between his campaign and guys like Hunter Wallace. They’ve broken that guy. Put him on suicide watch after Yang goes down* and his welfare money bill doesn’t get passed.
*Oh, and he’s definitely going down. There is no way he gets the nomination based on the demographics. And you’re not getting free money any more than Trump got his wall. Don’t kid yourself, that will NEVER get through congress. This isn’t a democracy but a repressive regime run by a few for the benefit of the few. Look how they’ve coordinated a smear campaign of Bernie Sanders over his medicare for all stance. They’ll even cheat if they have to.
I know a bit more than the average commenter here from reading economists like Hudson and the Georgists, but I’m definitely much less knowledgeable than you are. I’m glad you are actively commenting on these issues here. I learn a lot from your comments. It’s a shame that you are a lone voice in the wilderness here and that there is such a vast gulf in knowledge between you and your interlocutors, although it’s not really their fault. As you say, there is tremendous brainwashing and deliberate obfuscation regarding these matters.
Another good idea is to deny welfare to non-citizens. Seems like a fine plan. If they don’t find a job, deport deport deport. But it will never happen
In comment #37 you made the following statement:
The statement is false. How debts grow has nothing to do with how the interest is computed. Debts can grow or they can diminish. And when they grow they do not have to grow exponentially. They can grow as a linear function or as a logarithmic function or something else. It all depends on when and how many, how big loans somebody or some country takes. As you have probably noticed in your own experience as long a you pay installments on your car and home loans and if you do not take new loans your debt decreases. The fact that the interest part is calculate with an exponential formula is irrelevant.
One can look at the interest part of a loan as a fee for a loan. Just like a fee in the Islamic banking. This is just a semantics. Yet you think that there is a difference because you have been manipulated by Hudson’s book. Hudson is an old Trotskyist rabble-rouser. Getting the rabble excited with an inflammatory and false rhetoric is what the Trotskyist do. Take a cold shower and try to think for yourself. Do not let the Hudsons of this world manipulate you.
The interest rate, and how it is calculated, is integral to claims of the debt instrument. To say otherwise is making fantasy out of alignment with reality.
A debt money system at usury creates debt instruments, and its credit simultaneously. The “credit” is then recalled back to the debt instrument at an accounting rate. This accounting rate fluxes the money supply every month as people pay their debts. I’m going to say it slooowly. The Accounting cycle demands usury from the loan up-front, as you are NOT PAYING down principle. In the first cycles of the loan, it is pretty much all interest to the banker. This is a reverse exponential curve, where the exponent of interest is paid up front, and then you come down the curve as your pay principle in ever higher amounts over time. The loan is extinguished along with its credit at last payment cycle. Yes… you are coming down the curve, reducing your debts (principle owed) – but the overall claims of the instrument are MORE than the amount of money originally produced.
On a system wide scale, a debt money system is claiming more of the money supply than the money created (bank credit), and this then beggars thy neighbor. Public debts are a response to prevent private debts from beggaring they neighbor.
Anybody with nominal intelligence can calculate their mortgage over 15 or 30 years, and see that it claims more than the original “credit” it produced. Sometimes the amount claimed is 3X or more.
One can look at the interest part of a loan as a fee for a loan. Just like a fee in the Islamic banking.
A FEE is not interest banking. If you add a FEE to the note in the very beginning, then the FEE is paid up front. From then on, all repayments decrements principle. This is non usurious banking.
P+F does not equal P+I. F and I are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
Why are you confusing fees with interest, when they are two very different mathematical functions, and make the debt instrument behave in different ways?
IF banker’s wanted to, they could create debt instruments that pay you interest, hence their desire to go below the zero bound. In other words, you take out a loan at negative interest, and from then on the instrument pays you, which then decrements principle.
The idea behind negative rates is to get the banker’s out of the dog-house, where there are too many debts system wide, making too many claims on debtors. This will create a new debt cycle where new debts are used to pay off old debts. Negative rate proponents are the corporate banking class, who have discovered that the FED can pay them to stay solvent, through transfers in reserve loops. This class also makes money by owning corporate stock, or voting on the stock as trustees. (About 40% of American stocks are controlled by banking class.)
I’m not manipulated by anybody. You are assuming that I’m not educated in my own right! What an insult. Do you think I’m friendly toward Trotsky and Jews? Think again. If I met with Hudson I would probably rip hip a new one on the areas where he is wrong. In the same way you are wrong with some of your utterances and don’t want to take correction.
An intelligent person can see nuggets of truth where ever they are, an ideologue is incapable of that kind of thinking
The immigrants won’t keep any of it, unless they want to be homeless – their landlords will know they can afford another $1000 in rent. That goes for white renters too … and once their money is stolen by land trolls, they get to pay VAT too.
Shitlib welfare and other parasites don’t care about Yang. A “free” $1000 a month for them is a PAY CUT.
No non-White can look out for White interests. Whites’ stupid pathological altruism makes the reverse true, just suicidal and poorly done without a disciplined framework.