this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
824 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4303 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • A Seattle basic income pilot gave low-income residents $500 a month, nearly doubling employment rates.
  • Some participants reported getting new housing, while others saw their employment incomes rise.
  • Basic income pilots nationwide have seen noteworthy success, despite conservative opposition.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

UBI saves capitalism from itself. Do we really want to save this shit system that empowers the worst of us?

Do you honestly believe capitalists will allow a liveable UBI to remain untouched? Look at the minimum wage if you'd like to see the future of UBI. $7.25 an hour fucking shameful.

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 40 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're right we should do nothing instead and let people continue to starve.

[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'll start. I'm not going to eat now.

[–] this_1_is_mine@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I started yesterday. Take that capitalist. Can't make money of my continued existence if I'm not spending anything...

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bud, extreme change causes extreme strife. Having a system that allows us to transition from an old system that worked, to a new system that works better is the preffered method if you dont want to cause massive amounts of damage to peoples lives. The fact that UBI allows us to change towards a better way of functioning WITHOUT completely breaking the old system is a SELLING point. First we get people away from having to work merely to live, and THEN we can take further steps towards whichever utopic ideal we believe in

[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

First we get people away from having to work merely to live, and THEN we can take further steps towards whichever utopic ideal we believe in

I mean it's not even really a first, if, then, kind of deal, because they're both mutually inclusive goals to be working towards, rather than being mutually exclusive.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If thats your utopic ideal, than our current system with a UBI baseline will reach it. This feels like a technicality you are arguing with me on

[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean no not really, I was just kinda advocating for dual power because people always like to make a big fuss about how it's their way ideologically or the highway, without stopping for five seconds about how a lot of people's ideal goals are actually mutually inclusive or mutually beneficial.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Thats exactly why I phrased my statement the way I did though, just focussing on how UBI is a good transitioning block away from our current capitalist society, without specifically getting into whatever flavour of utopic society each user might have. I guess if your ideal society has shitloads of unhoused people being crushed by late stage capitalism, UBI would work against that outcome

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This program isn't UBI, and should not be compared to it, or used to argue for/against UBI. Universal Basic Income goes to everyone, not just certain people. That's what makes it UBI, and not a welfare program, which is what this is.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

To reinforce your point:

A Seattle-area guaranteed basic income pilot gave low-income residents $500 a month

102 participants

Employment in the group nearly doubled

Note that per a quick search Seattle has about 750k people, 102 specifically low income persons given money for some finite trial period is very very far from a test of universal basic income.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago

Do we really want to save this shit system that empowers the worst of us?

Do you want the masses to have the material means to do anything other than bow to systemic pressure?

[–] theparadox@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

While I agree with your sentiment, I do feel like it is a step in the right direction and will help a great many people in poverty.

Going straight from one economic system to another is likely to be an extremely violent process. I'm hoping that this would act as a stepping stone towards socialism rather than a life preserver for capitalism.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago

“The proposed change isn’t perfect, so why bother at all?”

[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Do we really want to save this shit system that empowers the worst of us?

How many times have you been forced to sleep out in the street?