Dem. Primary 2nd Stop - New Hampshire

[DanielVogelbach]

A fun thing to do is go back and watch the 2016 Election night from your favorite Liberal news and compare what they were saying Trump was going to do as President with what he has actually done. It just goes to show how whacked in the head Progressives are

The whole idea that one camp is "whacked in the head" while the other camp is perfectly logical and reasonable is EXACTLY what's killing this country!

The socialist - capitalist dichotomy is a thing of the past. We need to start grabbing the best from both systems. We can use "human centered capitalism", by scoring the success of the markets with different factors other than GDP. For example:

Quality of life and health-adjusted life expectancy
Happiness/Well-Being and Mental Health
Environmental quality
Affordability
Childhood success rates
Underemployment
Income Inequality
Consumer and Student Debt
Work and civic engagement levels
Volunteerism
Infant mortality
Quality of infrastructure
Access to education
Marriage and divorce rates
Substance abuse and related deaths
National optimism
Personal dynamism/economic mobility

In short, why use GDP as a proxy for how Americans are doing when we can easily measure that well-being directly? Let's start an American Scorecard, directly measuring the things we should be focusing on.

The reason I like Andrew Yang is because he doesn't look at Trump as the cause of any problems, and he doesn't denigrate Trump supporters. Instead, he views Trump as a symptom of Amazon automating away 4 million jobs and paying zero taxes. He empathizes with Trump supporters who were struggling economically and looking at Trump for an answer. Unfortunately, Yang got zero push in New Hampshire and yesterday marked the end of his campaign. Still, he was a newcomer and made it pretty far. I hope we'll see more of him in the future.

[Sibelius Hindemith]

Yeah, that $1000 a month for doing nothing should create lots of job growth in the drug dealing sector.

That said, i agree with you that the profit motive by itself does not foster the character and values that lead to a stronger and more cohesive society. But what system makes it more economically rewarding to do things that serve the general good than capitalism? The sad truth is that no amount of educating, or pressuring the majority of citizens will get them to care about national or global concerns more than the tasty garbage they can stuff down their gullets next.

[DanielVogelbach]

Yeah, that $1000 a month for doing nothing should create lots of job growth in the drug dealing sector.

The data doesn’t show this. In many of the studies where cash is given to the poor, there has been no increase in drug and alcohol use. In fact, many people use it to try and reduce their alcohol consumption or substance abuse. In Alaska, for example, people regularly put the petroleum dividend they receive from the state in accounts for their children’s education. The idea that poor people will be irresponsible with their money and squander it seems to be a biased stereotype rather than a truth.

Decision-making has been shown to improve when people have greater economic security. Giving people resources will enable them to make better decisions to improve their situation. As Dutch philosopher Rutger Bregman puts it, “Poverty is not a lack of character. It’s a lack of cash.”

Besides, the drug dealing sector is doing just fine, just look at opiate and amphetamine addiction under our current system; it's out of control - a product of using GDP as our measuring stick for success.

As technology improves, workers will be able to stop doing the most dangerous, repetitive, and boring jobs. This should excite us, but if Americans have no source of income—no ability to pay for groceries, buy homes, save for education, or start families with confidence—then the future could be very dark. Our labor participation rate now is only 62.7% – lower than it has been in decades, with 1 out of 5 working-age men currently out of the workforce. This will get much worse as self-driving cars and other technologies come online.

[DanielVogelbach]

The sad truth is that no amount of educating, or pressuring the majority of citizens will get them to care about national or global concerns more than the tasty garbage they can stuff down their gullets next.

The argument is that citizens don't actually care about GDP. We care about the quality of our lives. The argument is that we should score our success as a country based on how happy the citizens are. When we use GDP, we're not directly measuring what we care about. A person can be pretty selfish and agree with most of the metrics that Yang suggests we measure ourselves by. It's more about your current economic position than your selflessness or humanitarianism. People may not consider themselves "environmentalists", but they do like breathing clean air. If Yang is correct and automation starts swallowing up more jobs, then more Americans will lean into the philosophies. They'll see how GDP is not good to use as a sole measure for success.

[Sibelius Hindemith]

Yeah, that $1000 a month for doing nothing should create lots of job growth in the drug dealing sector.

The data doesn’t show this. In many of the studies where cash is given to the poor, there has been no increase in drug and alcohol use. In fact, many people use it to try and reduce their alcohol consumption or substance abuse. In Alaska, for example, people regularly put the petroleum dividend they receive from the state in accounts for their children’s education. The idea that poor people will be irresponsible with their money and squander it seems to be a biased stereotype rather than a truth.

I don't know about those studies, but my experiences tell me that when you give people stuff they didn't earn, it undermines their sense of worth. Also, there's many examples of people who won huge jackpots in the lottery and it destroyed their lives.

[DanielVogelbach]

Yeah, that $1000 a month for doing nothing should create lots of job growth in the drug dealing sector.

The data doesn’t show this. In many of the studies where cash is given to the poor, there has been no increase in drug and alcohol use. In fact, many people use it to try and reduce their alcohol consumption or substance abuse. In Alaska, for example, people regularly put the petroleum dividend they receive from the state in accounts for their children’s education. The idea that poor people will be irresponsible with their money and squander it seems to be a biased stereotype rather than a truth.

I don't know about those studies, but my experiences tell me that when you give people stuff they didn't earn, it undermines their sense of worth. Also, there's many examples of people who won huge jackpots in the lottery and it destroyed their lives.

If you take the lottery jackpot as a lump sum, it could be problematic. $1,000/mo. for rest of your life is not going to cause you problems. It's also not going to do anything to undermine your self worth when you're suddenly able to do more, feel more, be more, achieve more, breathe more, live more, etc. UBI is the only way to eliminate poverty. There is no other way.

Also, what's the economic value of parenting, volunteerism, producing artwork, or coaching little league baseball? In some cases, $1,000/mo. is going to be the difference between a corporate job and daycare versus staying at home and nurturing the baby. This is where Yang is grabbing the moderates and conservatives. $12k to avoid an abortion. $12k to raise the kid in a traditional way versus day care. He's also claiming that the University is oversold. Accountants will be automated away but plumbers and electricians are a lot harder to automate away. He's also sensitive to the fact that if you've been driving a truck for 30 years, it's not going to be easy to just learn another job in today's economy. So, basically you're views toward "hard work" don't account for any non-monetary contributions to society and they don't account for the fact that the rulers of the world aren't lifting a finger. Everything is being automated before our very eyes. As boring, repetitive, and dangerous jobs are eliminated, we should be rejoicing and ALL benefitting. Our labor participation rate now is only 62.7% – lower than it has been in decades, with 1 out of 5 working-age men currently out of the workforce. This will get much worse as self-driving cars and other technologies come online.

The Freedom Dividend—funded by a simple Value Added Tax—would guarantee that all Americans benefit from automation, not just big companies. The Freedom Dividend would provide money to cover the basics for Americans while enabling us to look for a better job, start our own business, go back to school, take care of our loved ones or work towards our next opportunity.
For more about why Andrew Yang believes so strongly in the Freedom Dividend, read his book “The War on Normal People”.

[D-train]

I just saw a clip of Warren proudly telling about meeting a college student that had $6 in the bank giving her $3. Said she had a mountain of college debt that needed to be forgiven. So basically she spent $3 on a lottery ticket and if she wins gets her debt erased. lol Coincidentally about the same odds of happening.

[Grandma Lynn]

If Pete won, what would his "mate"
be called?

Same thing Bill would have been called, First man? Thank God that didn't happen.

But I thought the President is first man...

[Grandma Lynn]

If Pete won, what would his "mate"
be called?

A Sodomite.

Hey, that's not nice!

[bpj]

A fun thing to do is go back and watch the 2016 Election night from your favorite Liberal news and compare what they were saying Trump was going to do as President with what he has actually done. It just goes to show how whacked in the head Progressives are

The whole idea that one camp is "whacked in the head" while the other camp is perfectly logical and reasonable is EXACTLY what's killing this country!

The socialist - capitalist dichotomy is a thing of the past. We need to start grabbing the best from both systems. We can use "human centered capitalism", by scoring the success of the markets with different factors other than GDP. For example:

Quality of life and health-adjusted life expectancy
Happiness/Well-Being and Mental Health
Environmental quality
Affordability
Childhood success rates
Underemployment
Income Inequality
Consumer and Student Debt
Work and civic engagement levels
Volunteerism
Infant mortality
Quality of infrastructure
Access to education
Marriage and divorce rates
Substance abuse and related deaths
National optimism
Personal dynamism/economic mobility

In short, why use GDP as a proxy for how Americans are doing when we can easily measure that well-being directly? Let's start an American Scorecard, directly measuring the things we should be focusing on.

The reason I like Andrew Yang is because he doesn't look at Trump as the cause of any problems, and he doesn't denigrate Trump supporters. Instead, he views Trump as a symptom of Amazon automating away 4 million jobs and paying zero taxes. He empathizes with Trump supporters who were struggling economically and looking at Trump for an answer. Unfortunately, Yang got zero push in New Hampshire and yesterday marked the end of his campaign. Still, he was a newcomer and made it pretty far. I hope we'll see more of him in the future.

The libs are whacked in the head, has nothing to do with conservatives or anyone in between.

We already have a basic income in this country. Its ZERO, and it's exactly what you lazy f**** deserve just for being alive- NOTHING.