Maybe because the people who hoard wealth are like everybody else and too few want to share?
So then why are you suggesting voluntary charity if you know it doesn’t actually work? Are you being deliberately dense?
If people choose to share their income, they can do it now. The debate hasn’t happened yet.
It has happened, just because your head is wedged so firmly up your own ass that you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.
why are you suggesting voluntary charity if you know it doesn’t actually work? Are you being deliberately dense?
You know he is. This dude can get fucked, I’m surprised he can type full sentences with how hard he’s bootlicking for billionaires.
I see both desires, to have UBI and to lcontinue as is. I don’t know which is stronger. I am writing these comments to find out.
Where has the debate happened? What was the result?
People are currently suffering. Every trial of UBI so far has been shown to alleviate suffering, and actually save money.
Open your eyes.
What’s your point? I am not opposing UBI. I am arguing that we can have it right now if people want it.
But not through individual charity. It simply does not work. Because we have been doing charity for decades, and it has not worked.
But it can work through taxes, to ensure that everyone contributes, and everyone benefits.
Let’s meet in the middle.
Have an open register among participants for who participates and how much they pay.
Then members are incentivized to increase the income of other members. You also have a pool of people for other projects like building cheap new housing.
That isn’t meeting in the middle. The people who are hoarding wealth have no incentive to participate.
There is no horded wealth. If you hoard wealth, the Fed will print money until liquidity is restored. The only money that counts is the one in circulation.
Regular citizens circulate enough money to get UBI going.
There is no horded wealth.
This is just about the single stupidest thing I have ever read in my entire life.
Well done. Good bye.
