-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Elon Musk tweets out support for Democratic candidate Andrew Yang
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
I'm not saying it should totally replace the income they had from a job, just enough to be above the poverty line and be able to function properly in society.
Have you ever known anyone happy to be stuck at the poverty line ? Noone wants to be stuck at bare minimum which is what ubi would be
I saw him at a podcast. He seems very down to earth. And like a more well-spoken Bernie Sanders.
Well I hope you're correct that it would be the bare minimum.
I really don't get the anti-Yang sentiment here. Did he ever say/do anything bad of note? I'm genuinely curious, he's not my top candidate but he doesn't seem at all like a bad guy.
I think a lot of people are wary because a lot of the people that support him have a libertarian, GGer, or even alt-right tilt.
I personally like the guy and like that he's for Medicare for All, but still don't like his policies on other things.
Gotcha, that makes a lot of sense and I've seen a lot of right-wing people talk favorably about him. I just feel like I haven't heard much of anything about him other than his $1k a month plan.
Agreed, glad to see more people sticking up for him here, he's a genuinely good guy with ideas worth considering. I think a lot of people here are just really invested in other outcomes
They look at UBI as a basis to phase out wellfare and not from a democratic socialist angle. It's techno-libertarians thinking they got the answers.
There's a very real incentive now, but the whole point of UBI is to prepare for a world where technology is meeting our needs, replacing traditional workers of all types. There's actually a lot of white collar administrative jobs - the type typically associated with at least a bachelor's degree - under threat from automation too. It's not just warehouse folks and truck drivers.
The world (and the economy) might actually be a lot better off if people are free to pursue education based on desire rather than being pigeonholed into something 'lucrative'. Plus, you know, not being saddled with a small mortgage worth of debt.
Right: "How are we going to pay for all that???"
Left: "It's not enough!!!"
The 12k amount isn't meant as a work replacement (aside from seniors) but rather something to soften the transition for those whose jobs have been automated away. A common criticism of Ubi in general is that it could kill incentive to work. Keeping the number around the poverty line is a middling approach that does a lot for those willing to have roommates while leaving plenty of desire for something better. It seems like a good starting point to me.
If Ubi becomes a reality I imagine it instantly becoming everyone's favorite policy and something people are going to want to see increase over time. Just getting a foot in the door is going to be a huge challenge though.
Left: "It's not enough!!!"
The 12k amount isn't meant as a work replacement (aside from seniors) but rather something to soften the transition for those whose jobs have been automated away. A common criticism of Ubi in general is that it could kill incentive to work. Keeping the number around the poverty line is a middling approach that does a lot for those willing to have roommates while leaving plenty of desire for something better. It seems like a good starting point to me.
If Ubi becomes a reality I imagine it instantly becoming everyone's favorite policy and something people are going to want to see increase over time. Just getting a foot in the door is going to be a huge challenge though.
Last edited:
12k on top of the 26k I make slaving away at my job would absolutely help me pursue more opportunities. 12k on it's own won't be enough to live on, so there's definitely still a need to work, however, for people who do work and don't get paid a lot, this would help tremendously
The most confusing part of the far left's reaction to Yang is calling him a tech bro. He's a lawyer who ran a test prep company then an entrepreneurship program. The charitable interpretation is they assume he's from tech because his key issue is automation but the sad reality is that it's likely just a racist assumption because he's Asian.
Yang addressed this in his recent H3H3 interview and his answer on the housing piece was pretty shaky. The idea is that the UBI and other proposed incentives would enable people to move more freely, which is probably true but not strong enough to be a real factor. That said, the other main costs of consumer goods, healthcare, and education are addressed well enough, and it's not like rent control or zoning regulations are implemented at a high enough level for the president to have power over them.
Yang addressed this in his recent H3H3 interview and his answer on the housing piece was pretty shaky. The idea is that the UBI and other proposed incentives would enable people to move more freely, which is probably true but not strong enough to be a real factor. That said, the other main costs of consumer goods, healthcare, and education are addressed well enough, and it's not like rent control or zoning regulations are implemented at a high enough level for the president to have power over them.
I didn't mean to misrepresent myself 😄
Truthfully I hadn't paid much attention to Ubi until a US presidential candidate started talking about it.
I actually share your concern on rent. It seems one of the areas we likely would see inflation. I haven't heard Yang offer much in the way of solutions here. He suggests with Ubi more people would be in a position to own which would lower rental demand which could possibly help with pricing. The real solution though is more affordable housing being built. I'm not sure how much of a role the federal government will be in this happening (in the US).
Not sure why people are so against musk on this forum , he's probably doing more for humanity than anyone else rigt now but that's another thread, yang seems like a solid person and ubi in some form will be a necessity in the furure, I'm glad candidates like Yang are getting support from influential and intelligent people. Yang, sanders and warren seem like the only 3 semi trustworthy candidates so any support for them
Is good in my book
Is good in my book
I'm not voting for Yang in the primaries, but I think, as other people have said, it's worth keeping him in the debates simply to bring these conversations to the table. Even if his plan is flawed, simply talking about UBI and how we will work around automation I think is beneficial and helps expand people's ideas about what is possible. I also like his demeanor in how he approaches the topics.
Just sometimes you don't need to apply science to things. It's honestly the biggest turn off for any person when I hear them speak. If every problem you discuss revolves around some scientific theory as a means of solution it shows a lack of empathy to me.
You really need receipts on why Musk is an asshole and some of us feel he's not actually helping humanity like he wants you to think?
I actually caught a snippet of this guy talking to H3 last night since I'd never heard of him before and was kinda curious. I wouldn't say H3 is a good place to be probing someone aiming for the presidency, but he slipped a few times even just there.
When pushed on his idea of the freedom dividend and where it would come from he mentioned a 10% flat tax on internet based businesses like Amazon. When pushed again on whether that 10% would be reflected back onto customers his only answer was we'd hope not but its up to the companies. He also let slip that since the dividend is built up while out of the country and paid upon return there's nothing currently planned to prevent people living abroad ducking back for lump sums currently so it's easily abusable.
So even his biggest talking point seems hugely flawed. He also managed to squeeze in a 'maybe fps will make you dangerous' while trying to say he doesn't feel gamers are the problem when it comes to shootings.
So he seems like at best his messaging is all over the place, or at worst he's saying what he feels will net support rather than anything he truly believes in.
When pushed on his idea of the freedom dividend and where it would come from he mentioned a 10% flat tax on internet based businesses like Amazon. When pushed again on whether that 10% would be reflected back onto customers his only answer was we'd hope not but its up to the companies. He also let slip that since the dividend is built up while out of the country and paid upon return there's nothing currently planned to prevent people living abroad ducking back for lump sums currently so it's easily abusable.
So even his biggest talking point seems hugely flawed. He also managed to squeeze in a 'maybe fps will make you dangerous' while trying to say he doesn't feel gamers are the problem when it comes to shootings.
So he seems like at best his messaging is all over the place, or at worst he's saying what he feels will net support rather than anything he truly believes in.
The trades are actually alive and well. It's just that college degree is the new high school diploma.
Is that the wrong way to do it? I dunno. It's like asking: Are college humanities classes useful, on average?
I'd say yes?
Someone from Silicon Valley arguing for something we need that's been propagandized as an enemy to "work as dignity" means he's one of the more toxic candidates in this election if our threshold is "beat Donald Trump with someone stable".
Yang's always been a sacrificial lamb candidate to me. Get him in to talk about automation, because people have no clue that the only bigger macro issue we face this century is climate. Instead we're stuck in the ditches scapegoating non-whites as thieves while companies are literally the robber barons. And America frequently allows things to grow into a crisis, and this will be one of them.
Most of them adopt a libertarian point of view and will still do everything possible to make sure they have to give up none of their massive wealth
thank you, this post made me laugh a lot. "musk does more for humanity than anyone else right now" is the funniest shit i've read all week
Where exactly do people keep getting this from? Yangs proposal does no such thing. He just assumes many people will forgo using existing benefits in favor of the UBI because it comes with no stigma or requirements and would give people more freedom... In no way shape or form does his plan cut any existing benefits or programs.
Wrongo:
His own website
See, consolidation will lead to cuts and making people choose between their current benefits and a measly 1k per month will result in people that need them either not being eligible or losing their benefits.
Well that's a cynical take, I don't interpret that as cutting programs but being given a choice... I don't see however that's taking away anything from anyone, many people lose those benefits if they get a job or make too much money leaving them trapped or with no incentive to try to improve their situation, the freedom dividend would be superior in many cases, and as already pointed out earlier does stack with SSDI
What is the issue with cutting existing social programs that overlap in purpose of a ubi? I see ubi as social security for all so you could phase that out. No need for unemployment or at least at the percentage it is now. Food stamps and housing assistance could be dramatically reduced or eliminated as well. Disability needs to stay. From what I recall Yang's plan was to give people the option to choose ubi or existing programs for whatever they get the most benefit from.
It's funnier still when you consider the policy doesn't actually add up, especially for a someone who claims to love maths.
Some time between March and June he must have realised the base figures didn't add up to be sufficient to cover the $2.4 billion, as an older version of the policy only amounted to $2.2 billion, but they seem to have changed the figure they're using for "economic growth".
His figures remain incorrect or intentionally misleading.
- The growth figure is based on a study that funded via deficit spending not a consumption tax and replacement of existing benefits. Under the scenario he proposes, the figure should be something like 80% less or circa $200B, which adds an additional $800M hole.
- US federal welfare spending programs amount to more like $350 billion - not $500-600 million, so there's a $250M additional hole.