▲ 742 ▼ Pew pew pew! (lemmy.ca) submitted 2 years ago by WashedOver@lemmy.ca to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) Exactly. Only the rich should get a say in the use of federal funds. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago (2 children) Didn’t say that, just saying that it’s a tired argument that the average struggling American is over taxed. That’s an argument used by the wealthy to cut their taxes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) The average struggling American IS over taxed. Because the average wage is under poverty. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] lemmyman@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're using "taxed" in a different sense here. Clever, but not helpful permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Tax = monetary exchange between government and an entity. They can be negative. The money doesn't flow just one way. Just ask amazon. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BB69@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) But they’re eligible for tax credits that end up reimbursing or paying them more than what the total liability was anyways. Not to mention the benefits they’re eligible for being under poverty levels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Should be more, is my point, until it covers the cost of surviving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stevehobbes@lemy.lol 2 points 2 years ago Amen. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RippleEffect@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sarcasm? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Sarcasm?? Not on my Internet! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BB69@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago (2 children) Didn’t say that, just saying that it’s a tired argument that the average struggling American is over taxed. That’s an argument used by the wealthy to cut their taxes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) The average struggling American IS over taxed. Because the average wage is under poverty. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] lemmyman@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're using "taxed" in a different sense here. Clever, but not helpful permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Tax = monetary exchange between government and an entity. They can be negative. The money doesn't flow just one way. Just ask amazon. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BB69@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) But they’re eligible for tax credits that end up reimbursing or paying them more than what the total liability was anyways. Not to mention the benefits they’re eligible for being under poverty levels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Should be more, is my point, until it covers the cost of surviving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stevehobbes@lemy.lol 2 points 2 years ago Amen. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) The average struggling American IS over taxed. Because the average wage is under poverty. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] lemmyman@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're using "taxed" in a different sense here. Clever, but not helpful permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Tax = monetary exchange between government and an entity. They can be negative. The money doesn't flow just one way. Just ask amazon. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BB69@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) But they’re eligible for tax credits that end up reimbursing or paying them more than what the total liability was anyways. Not to mention the benefits they’re eligible for being under poverty levels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Should be more, is my point, until it covers the cost of surviving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lemmyman@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're using "taxed" in a different sense here. Clever, but not helpful permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Tax = monetary exchange between government and an entity. They can be negative. The money doesn't flow just one way. Just ask amazon. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Tax = monetary exchange between government and an entity. They can be negative. The money doesn't flow just one way. Just ask amazon. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BB69@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) But they’re eligible for tax credits that end up reimbursing or paying them more than what the total liability was anyways. Not to mention the benefits they’re eligible for being under poverty levels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Should be more, is my point, until it covers the cost of surviving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Should be more, is my point, until it covers the cost of surviving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BB69@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children) Look, I’m not sure of anything about you, but I grew up poor. I’ve worked in banking for 7 years. When people of poverty come in to money, the vast majority don’t save it for essentials, they go out and spend it on luxuries. You could drop 10k in their accounts every year, it’s going to be spent on tvs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever. The real solution is lowering the cost of essentials. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago Literally every test of UBI has results that go counter to your anecdote. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fapforce5@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago You say they spend it on TVs, cars, clothes, iPhones, whatever, like it's a bad thing. A good tv is only a few hundred so 3% of your 10,000. If someone is trying to improve their employment they will need new clothes, reliable transportation, and reliable communication. 10,000 for a car is not a good car, but enough to get to work on time. I agree that lowering the cost of essentials is good, but incredibly hard in a free market. It's easier to raise wages through legislation permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh, or you're one of those people who think they know what other people should consider "essential", and think anything that isn't good voting and shelter is a luxury with no value to a human? I guess in that situation the UBI results wouldn't impact your opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RippleEffect@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sarcasm? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Sarcasm?? Not on my Internet! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Sarcasm?? Not on my Internet! permalink fedilink source parent
