Just tax us at 100% and decide what is best for us all and our income. That is what far leftists really want.
Universal Jobs Now?..
- Thread starter IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life
- Start date
If the govt is giving you our income, provides your housing, provides your food, and provides your medical care, you are simply a slave...without the lashings
I don't know how it would be implemented but I find it odd that conservatives would be so naturally against this.
Arn't they the ones that are afraid of people not working to earn their keep? Arn't they the ones the complain that someone could sit on their butts at home and draw huge amounts in welfare?
So someone suggests that maybe we give everyone gainful employment and conservatives are pissed about that too!!!
I swear if Omar suddenly started opposing abortion they would start backing abortion to spite her.
Arn't they the ones that are afraid of people not working to earn their keep? Arn't they the ones the complain that someone could sit on their butts at home and draw huge amounts in welfare?
So someone suggests that maybe we give everyone gainful employment and conservatives are pissed about that too!!!
I swear if Omar suddenly started opposing abortion they would start backing abortion to spite her.
I think they're more upset that you're, again, "giving" someone something - exactly as you described it.
This also doesn't mean that someone won't "work" and sit on their butt at the job or not earn their keep. Is there a way to enforce that people work hard that I'm aware of -- without whips, or other similar forms of punishment?
The bill does not call for a liveable wage for all Americans. It would set up a pilot program to help distressed areas. But, it's a Cory Booker bill so it's probable stupid.
Last edited:
What would be the point of innovation? How do people better themselves? How do we advance our family - or society?
Are you going to offer actual suggestions on how this would realistically work or will you just throw out your political agenda and berate the opposition?
Right conservatives only like giving people money if they vote for other conservatives.
As with your question, the details would be my question and possibly the rub and I'm not going to read Breitbart for them. But if you could theoretically give everyone who honestly wanted to work a full time job that paid a living wage, why in the heck would anyone oppose that?
Again what are the details? (Breitbart isn't a reliable source.) I havn't seen any details I've just seen conservatives pissed at the idea that people who want to work be given jobs.
Has Omar lost it? She wants "full employment at livable wages for all Americans"? That monster!
Let me guess, her far left agenda includes not locking kids in cages or not letting people die because they can't afford healthcare.
Let me guess, her far left agenda includes not locking kids in cages or not letting people die because they can't afford healthcare.
Good. That settles the 2nd amendment debate.
You'll kill employers and the economy as a result. Just because someone "wants" to work doesn't mean that they will be a good worker. Why should an employer have to hire someone because they express a desire to work? Should your company be forced to hire the first person that applies for a job opening at your job? Regardless of fit, ability to do the job, desire to work hard, willingness to do right by the company, etc. How would that work out over the course of two months, let alone a decade? How will the employer continue to pay people if the people they bring on aren't helping the company?
It's a good idea until you take even a second to think about it. Then, I'd love for you to explain how it would even close to theoretically pan out in a positive way.
Want to see how it works when people don't give a F? Go sit at a busy DOT office for a day and take a look around. Then imagine if everything in the world operated in the same manner. Great proposal.
This totally shreds the Republican argument pointed out by Hoosier's over Rs wanting forced work for welfare.
Forcing people to work who feign the desire to work makes no sense.
Employers lose, and individuals lose when employers lose.
Exactly! The federal government would have to create jobs for the worst of the worst. These jobs aren't "needed", they do not exist because there is no demand. The government would have to create beurocratic jobs at a wage that is above market pay. Then why would anyone work at McDonalds when they say they can't find a job and would be promised a higher paying job with fantastic benefits in a better work environment?
Why would we give you any income if we are going to tax you 100%? You cons are bad at government.
The government didn’t own slaves, private industry did. So if we apply your logic to reality, you’re a slave if private enterprise provides your income, housing, food and medical care. Good argument mate.
And now you artfully reveal why people defend (sometimes damn near worship) corporatism. They think only the corporation is a trustworthy provider of goods and services, despite that the corporation is trying to either eliminate and/or outsource them as soon as possible.The government didn’t own slaves, private industry did. So if we apply your logic to reality, you’re a slave if private enterprise provides your income, housing, food and medical care. Good argument mate.
Does the bill say all private companies must hire the first applicant and every other applicant that wants to work? I doubt it, I think your lying.
Would be a great place for a small bar. Order a drink or two, primo people watching.
Isn’t there an old saying that it’s impossible to get a person to believe something if their livelihood depends on them not believing it? I recall a story about a West Virginia mining town. Big strip mine at the edge town, most everyone depended on the mine directly or indirectly. You know the picture.
There was a flood in the valley and coal waste washed out of the mine and containment systems. Covered the downtown, spoiled the land, polluted the water. Children had to be sent out of town for their safety. Again, a familiar picture.
Well later that year it was time to elect a mayor. Some guy ran on the idea of forcing the mine to clean up the town and adopt better practices. The other guy ran on policies that were friendly to the mine. The town voted for the friendly mine guy.
Most people are slaves because they are afraid of freedom.
I’m not sure I’ve ever had a bad DOT experience. Probably because I’m pretty.
In all honesty, if we REALLY want innovation, there are strong economic arguments in favor of things like universal access to healthcare where the health insurance chaining you to your corporate job is severed and something like Andrew Yang's universal basic income.
The poor will spend that UBI because, well, they have to. For those who want to be doing something else - staying home and raising kids, going to school, volunteering back into the community - it gives a safety net....and for those thousands of people who have great ideas but just can't take the risk of giving up health insurance while taking the risk of starting something brand new, it can give just enough cushion to encourage taking a chance.
If done right, you also consolidate/streamline some of the government support/aid programs we have today.
Universal income and healthcare go way beyond any definition of classical liberalism I’ve ever encountered. That is straight up democratic socialism. Welcome to Bernie’s world.
