Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I think it was Trip who brought up this topic awhile back. Brought to you by automation, illegal labor, and outsourcing. Move over Seattle! When will the liberal madness stop?

At least Sarah Palin gets it.

Stockton's young mayor has bold turnaround plan: Basic income and stipends for potential shooters

Tubbs, a Stockton native and Stanford graduate who is all of 27 years old, wants to give at least $500 a month to a select group of residents. They’ll be able to spend it as they wish, for 18 months, in a pilot program to test the impact of what’s called guaranteed basic income.

If the very sound of that knocked you half off your chair, this next initiative might finish the job.

Stockton is about to award stipends of up to $1,000 a month to residents deemed most likely to shoot somebody. This program is called Advance Peace, and it’s modeled after a crime reduction program in the Bay Area city of Richmond.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california ... story.html

kalm wrote:I think it was Trip who brought up this topic awhile back. Brought to you by automation, illegal labor, and outsourcing. Move over Seattle! When will the liberal madness stop?

At least Sarah Palin gets it.

Stockton's young mayor has bold turnaround plan: Basic income and stipends for potential shooters

Tubbs, a Stockton native and Stanford graduate who is all of 27 years old, wants to give at least $500 a month to a select group of residents. They’ll be able to spend it as they wish, for 18 months, in a pilot program to test the impact of what’s called guaranteed basic income.

If the very sound of that knocked you half off your chair, this next initiative might finish the job.

Stockton is about to award stipends of up to $1,000 a month to residents deemed most likely to shoot somebody. This program is called Advance Peace, and it’s modeled after a crime reduction program in the Bay Area city of Richmond.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california ... story.html

Finland just tried exactly the same project with the same sample size.

I would say this guy didn’t get the memo on how it turned out, but that would be silly... of course he got the memo

He probably just said, “Well, they didn’t do it right... THIS TIME it will work”

Kind of like socialism/communism....THIS TIME it will work. Lol

AZGrizFan wrote:Kind of like socialism/communism....THIS TIME it will work. Lol

Famed commies like Hayek, Friedman, and Nixon thought it worthy of pursuit..

The idea isn’t new. As Frum notes, Friederich Hayek endorsed it. In 1962, the libertarian economist Milton Friedman advocated a minimum guaranteed income via a “negative income tax.” In 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.” Richard Nixon unsuccessfully tried to pass a version of Friedman’s plan a few years later, and his Democratic opponent in the 1972 presidential election, George McGovern, also suggested a guaranteed annual income.

More recently, in a 2006 book, conservative intellectual Charles Murray proposed eliminating all welfare transfer programs, including Social Security and Medicare, and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone 21 years and older. The Alaska Permanent Fund, funded by investments from state oil revenues, sends annual dividend checks to the state’s residents. Switzerland is voting on an unconditional basic income later this year. (Though the fundamental basic-income guarantee involves an unconditional grant to every citizen, no matter their wealth or age, other versions wouldn’t cut checks to those in top tax brackets or those receiving Social Security.)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatl ... le/375600/

It's worth a controlled experiment...although I instinctively run away from any concept that faux-conservative, Clinton-lover David Frum endorses.

Ivytalk wrote:It's worth a controlled experiment...although I instinctively run away from any concept that faux-conservative, Clinton-lover David Frum endorses.

Unfortunately there is nowhere to land safely in the world of Economics

We've got Hedge Fund Managers writing themselves $150 million dollar bonuses and laughing at us
and guys like Bernie Maddoff just flat out stealing $65 Billion

Where is the middle ground where we do right by each other..?

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Kind of like socialism/communism....THIS TIME it will work. Lol

Famed commies like Hayek, Friedman, and Nixon thought it worthy of pursuit..

The idea isn’t new. As Frum notes, Friederich Hayek endorsed it. In 1962, the libertarian economist Milton Friedman advocated a minimum guaranteed income via a “negative income tax.” In 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.” Richard Nixon unsuccessfully tried to pass a version of Friedman’s plan a few years later, and his Democratic opponent in the 1972 presidential election, George McGovern, also suggested a guaranteed annual income.

More recently, in a 2006 book, conservative intellectual Charles Murray proposed eliminating all welfare transfer programs, including Social Security and Medicare, and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone 21 years and older. The Alaska Permanent Fund, funded by investments from state oil revenues, sends annual dividend checks to the state’s residents. Switzerland is voting on an unconditional basic income later this year. (Though the fundamental basic-income guarantee involves an unconditional grant to every citizen, no matter their wealth or age, other versions wouldn’t cut checks to those in top tax brackets or those receiving Social Security.)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatl ... le/375600/

I’m glad they mentioned Alaska in their examples. That’s a /thread right there

BTW of all the people named in there, only one has any nonpolitical credibility.

kalm wrote:I think it was Trip who brought up this topic awhile back. Brought to you by automation, illegal labor, and outsourcing. Move over Seattle! When will the liberal madness stop?

Yeah, started a thread on it awhile ago... went about as you'd expect.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 10&t=45353

But, the truth is - SOMETHING is going to need to be done. Our economy simply doesn't need workers like it once did. There are more and more workers and less and less demand.

Modern conservatives just find the imperfections in everything and drive it into the ground. There isn't going to be a perfect solution. It's easy to demonstrate why a suggestion isn't perfect. But, conservatives bring absolutely nothing to the table.

For the people that are going to spend the rest of the thread finding flaws in the suggestions - how about you tell us a better solution?

Skjellyfetti wrote:

kalm wrote:I think it was Trip who brought up this topic awhile back. Brought to you by automation, illegal labor, and outsourcing. Move over Seattle! When will the liberal madness stop?

Yeah, started a thread on it awhile ago... went about as you'd expect.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 10&t=45353

But, the truth is - SOMETHING is going to need to be done. Our economy simply doesn't need workers like it once did. There are more and more workers and less and less demand.

Modern conservatives just find the imperfections in everything and drive it into the ground. There isn't going to be a perfect solution. It's easy to demonstrate why a suggestion isn't perfect. But, conservatives bring absolutely nothing to the table.

For the people that are going to spend the rest of the thread finding flaws in the suggestions - how about you tell us a better solution?

Good post SK. Sorry I didn’t attribute it to you.

Yeah...I think it’s enevitable sans a complete meltdown.

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Famed commies like Hayek, Friedman, and Nixon thought it worthy of pursuit..




https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatl ... le/375600/

I’m glad they mentioned Alaska in their examples. That’s a /thread right there

BTW of all the people named in there, only one has any nonpolitical credibility.

I assume Hayek?

Btw, Alaska was brought up in the OP and supporting link.

Thanks for reading, you lazy summofabitch.

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
I’m glad they mentioned Alaska in their examples. That’s a /thread right there

BTW of all the people named in there, only one has any nonpolitical credibility.

I assume Hayek?

Btw, Alaska was brought up in the OP and supporting link.

Thanks for reading, you lazy summofabitch.

Well in spite of Jelly's zero sum assumptions about conservatives...

I have actually come out several times for a guaranteed income - and everybody under 100k or so per year gets it-

but I also believe it would be impossible to implement in a way that 1) actually keeps people from starving or dying of exposure and 2) doesnt create additional strains between the creators and the consumers

Alaska is a great example - they are still stratified, they still have poverty that runs same same with northeastern states... and the Federal government actually adjusts the number below which a person is considered to be "in poverty" to be higher than the rest of the country. The only other state they do that with is Hawai'i. The reason for that in AK is obvious- the free market adjusted to the stipend incomes there. The same thing would happen in the lower 48. And as is usually the case with state sponsored handouts - the middle class would be the more adversely affected by the inflation than any other class, while the lower classes would see little to no improvement in their situations over time

the rulemaking process for such a program alone would make the ACA looking like a legislative masterpiece

Which brings me back to the question Ive been asking on this board for literally years (and nobody has ventured an answer)...

Where does this trust in our government to do things right come from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Skjellyfetti wrote:

kalm wrote:I think it was Trip who brought up this topic awhile back. Brought to you by automation, illegal labor, and outsourcing. Move over Seattle! When will the liberal madness stop?

Yeah, started a thread on it awhile ago... went about as you'd expect.

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... 10&t=45353

But, the truth is - SOMETHING is going to need to be done. Our economy simply doesn't need workers like it once did. There are more and more workers and less and less demand.

Modern conservatives just find the imperfections in everything and drive it into the ground. There isn't going to be a perfect solution. It's easy to demonstrate why a suggestion isn't perfect. But, conservatives bring absolutely nothing to the table.

For the people that are going to spend the rest of the thread finding flaws in the suggestions - how about you tell us a better solution?

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Famed commies like Hayek, Friedman, and Nixon thought it worthy of pursuit..




https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatl ... le/375600/

I’m glad they mentioned Alaska in their examples. That’s a /thread right there

BTW of all the people named in there, only one has any nonpolitical credibility.

There are few things more amusing to watch and hear than a couple of grizzly-looking bush dwellers excoriating the gubmint while standing in line for their gubmint check.

Ivytalk wrote:It's worth a controlled experiment...although I instinctively run away from any concept that faux-conservative, Clinton-lover David Frum endorses.

better to keep the underclasses at each others throats.

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
I assume Hayek?

Btw, Alaska was brought up in the OP and supporting link.

Thanks for reading, you lazy summofabitch.

Well in spite of Jelly's zero sum assumptions about conservatives...

I have actually come out several times for a guaranteed income - and everybody under 100k or so per year gets it-

but I also believe it would be impossible to implement in a way that 1) actually keeps people from starving or dying of exposure and 2) doesnt create additional strains between the creators and the consumers

Alaska is a great example - they are still stratified, they still have poverty that runs same same with northeastern states... and the Federal government actually adjusts the number below which a person is considered to be "in poverty" to be higher than the rest of the country. The only other state they do that with is Hawai'i. The reason for that in AK is obvious- the free market adjusted to the stipend incomes there. The same thing would happen in the lower 48. And as is usually the case with state sponsored handouts - the middle class would be the more adversely affected by the inflation than any other class, while the lower classes would see little to no improvement in their situations over time

the rulemaking process for such a program alone would make the ACA looking like a legislative masterpiece

Which brings me back to the question Ive been asking on this board for literally years (and nobody has ventured an answer)...

Where does this trust in our government to do things right come from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh...you actually were looking for an answer?

Socialism for the Bankers and Austerity for everybody else...

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Well in spite of Jelly's zero sum assumptions about conservatives...

I have actually come out several times for a guaranteed income - and everybody under 100k or so per year gets it-

but I also believe it would be impossible to implement in a way that 1) actually keeps people from starving or dying of exposure and 2) doesnt create additional strains between the creators and the consumers

Alaska is a great example - they are still stratified, they still have poverty that runs same same with northeastern states... and the Federal government actually adjusts the number below which a person is considered to be "in poverty" to be higher than the rest of the country. The only other state they do that with is Hawai'i. The reason for that in AK is obvious- the free market adjusted to the stipend incomes there. The same thing would happen in the lower 48. And as is usually the case with state sponsored handouts - the middle class would be the more adversely affected by the inflation than any other class, while the lower classes would see little to no improvement in their situations over time

the rulemaking process for such a program alone would make the ACA looking like a legislative masterpiece

Which brings me back to the question Ive been asking on this board for literally years (and nobody has ventured an answer)...

Where does this trust in our government to do things right come from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh...you actually were looking for an answer?

In a perfect world I'd get one

But considering who Ive asked on this board over the last few years...

we'll just say my expectations are low


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Oh...you actually were looking for an answer?

In a perfect world I'd get one

But considering who Ive asked on this board over the last few years...

we'll just say my expectations are low


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a hangover from the New Deal would be my guess. You might be just under the age group that still remembers when the average citizen from both parties trusted the government to do the right thing on behalf of the governed.

houndawg wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
In a perfect world I'd get one

But considering who Ive asked on this board over the last few years...

we'll just say my expectations are low


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a hangover from the New Deal would be my guess. You might be just under the age group that still remembers when the average citizen from both parties trusted the government to do the right thing on behalf of the governed.

I grew up at the end of that era

but it has its pitfalls also - mainly being that it gave rise to the most asinine, self serving abortion of a generation that was ever shat out onto this country

I have greeted the departure of the Greatest Generation with a bit of sadness and nostalgia. The death of the last boomer (if I see it) will have the opposite effect on me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote: Where does this trust in our government to do things right come from?

So, we should trust the market to show pity as people fall out of the workforce? The invisible hand is going start patting people on the back whose skills are no longer needed.

We've seen this already happen with coal mining. Next time you're back in the states, go down to Grundy Co., VA and see if the market, charity or ANYTHING is doing much to help a region left behind by the economy.

Government isn't a perfect solution. But, I'm not seeing a better one.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

CID1990 wrote: Where does this trust in our government to do things right come from?

So, we should trust the market to show pity as people fall out of the workforce? The invisible hand is going start patting people on the back whose skills are no longer needed.

We've seen this already happen with coal mining. Next time you're back in the states, go down to Grundy Co., VA and see if the market, charity or ANYTHING is doing much to help a region left behind by the economy.

Government isn't a perfect solution. But, I'm not seeing a better one.

Why does it have to be an either or choice? We should be arguing over what ratio is the best.

The market hasn't done shit and isn't going to.

They're not going to go back to sending hundreds of guys down in the mines out of the goodness of their hearts when they can just take down the mountain with some heavy machinery with a fraction of the workforce.

I don't see why it would be any different for retail jobs or any other industry that will be disappearing.

Skjellyfetti wrote:The market hasn't done **** and isn't going to.

They're not going to go back to sending hundreds of guys down in the mines out of the goodness of their hearts when they can just take down the mountain with some heavy machinery with a fraction of the workforce.

I don't see why it would be any different for retail jobs or any other industry that will be disappearing.

And your leftist government is going to send them back down. Or are they going to give them a living wage and a heroin ration to numb their senses?

How have central economies done historically? You want me to trust the government with my welfare?

The solution is government oversight and targeted encouragement and the question is how much.

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Oh...you actually were looking for an answer?

In a perfect world I'd get one

But considering who Ive asked on this board over the last few years...

we'll just say my expectations are low


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As well they should be. The desire to be taken care of is modern human nature.

I think it’s a worthy discussion so let’s start with the idea that “trust” and “right things” are fairly nebulous concepts.