Monday, December 30, 2019
Wednesday, October 23, 2019
"Bernie or Bust"
I see a country completely divided and at war with its self. I notice republicans who have an intense hatred for "liberals". I also notice a vast amount of democrats who have an intense hatred for Trump, for anyone who supported Trump and for conservatives. I notice democrats, liberals and progressives wallowing and reveling in this hatred, taking extreme pride in anger and hatred for the "enemy". Justified, self-righteous hatred.
People love to fight an enemy. Fight, fight fight!! If the "enemy" was some small group of "evil" people then its possible this intense hatred MIGHT be somehow useful. But when people are so passionately hateful of roughly half of America, I ask how this can possibly be constructive. I also ask if a president like Sanders or Warren can heal this problem of polarization and hatred? I really don't see it. These candidates are popular specifically because they have "fought" for so long against the conservative enemy that people are the left is so in love with hatred. They have gained popularity partly because they talk about economic inequality but also because they have fanned the flames of hatred for one half of the country against the other. I don't see that as a winning scenario.
When I see Andrew Yang talk, I notice none of this rally to fight against anyone. I hear about policies, solutions that address issues that matter to me, economic inequality, poverty, technology and our human future. I hear him talk of a vision for the human race that is a "Star-Trek economy" where people are not required to work at a job to justify their right to exist, but instead people are guaranteed a baseline to meet their needs as a right of citizenship. Energies can be spent on bettering one's self and doing what one is passionate about. This is the vision of the future to fight for. It is worth all of us spending our entire lives fighting for, regardless if any of us ever see the fruits of that fight. That is the vision. It is a futuristic vision, not a nostalgic vision, looking back to some idealistic version of the 1950s when every American had a good factory job and could afford to have 2.5 kids with a good union job.
Yang's main slogans are "Humanity First" and "It isn't left or right, it's Forward". Notice it is "Humanity" first, not some tired rhetoric about the middle class. This is what the Universal Basic Income achieves. Universal Basic Income was something that Bernie was in support of until the very moment that Yang started running and all of a sudden Bernie abandoned the idea, claiming in a fatherly way "we are not going to do that". Instead, Bernie proposed the Guaranteed Federal Jobs program directly to shoot down UBI. What will that program do to help an artist like myself? I have all but given up on my dream of art and work at a call center because 'the market' has decided my art to be of no value in actual dollars. And Bernie's solution? A few extra dollars an hour at my call center job (soon to be automated). If I become unemployed, I can do artwork? No, "We need road workers, child-care workers, our bridges are crumbling, a job supplied by the government for every American who wants to work". I am insulted by the idea.
As for healing the country, and doing so while also defeating Trump:
"It isn't left or right, it's Forward", Yang can do both of these things in a way, I don't see coming from Bernie or Warren. At the last debate the candidates were asked "Who is a friend you have that people might be surprised about?" Yang began talking about "Fred" the trucker. Fred Ramsey is one of my friend's on Facebook and is an ex-Trump supporter who has voted republican all of his life. He has now switched his party to democrat to vote for Yang. Fred has made many videos about how because of Yang, he has learned "it isn't immigrants taking our jobs, it is automation". Fred talks about how he began to realize that every human deserves a basic standard of living via the UBI. This is a conservative who is now spouting human rights and equality for all. All the while, so many of my so called 'progressive' friends and family members have come out against UBI and begun reverting to 'work ethic' mantras. I am on 5 or 6 different social media YangGang groups where I see thousands of comments from Yang supporters and the story is the same over and over, Trump supporters and conservatives who have realized that anti-immigrant fear is not needed, that the UBI can be a right for all Americans, regardless of work status, that no one needs to live in poverty and struggle- right along with the tens of thousands of democrats, progressives and socialist-leaning Yang supporters. There is no shame, no hatred in the Yang Gang. We all want Humanity to move forward with automation and UBI. There are no human enemies or the fanning the flames of hatred toward half the country.
10/28/2019
"The only candidate that represents the poor and working classes is Bernie Sanders."
This is a false statement. What policies does Bernie have to help the homeless and unemployed (the actual poor)? Why did Bernie flip flop and abandon true humanitarian values via the Universal Basic income? Policies that stress the need for people to work in order to justify their right to exist are capitalist under a thin mask. No one can claim to care about the poor and homeless and also be against the Universal Basic income. I am sick of "work ethic" rhetoric. "Bernie has been saying the same thing for 40 years." Untrue, but also insufficient. The world has changed in 40 years, the world has changed in ten years. We need modern solutions that the old have shown they are not willing to provide. To be ruled over by well meaning people in their 70's who cannot keep up with the times, who cannot boldly face the changing reality of poverty and the modern world as a whole is unacceptable.
As an actual "poor person", unlike the vast majority of Bernie supporters (middle class and above), I will not let this go. Universal Basic Income is the only policy that recognizes the rights of citizens simply for being alive, SEPARATE from a "job". The time has come for this idea. I have no respect for a politician who does not support Universal Basic Income. How can anyone sit in their luxury home, ride their airplanes, live their comfortable lives and be against this idea? To ideologically tie a basic standard of living to a job is not radical or egalitarian.
People love to fight an enemy. Fight, fight fight!! If the "enemy" was some small group of "evil" people then its possible this intense hatred MIGHT be somehow useful. But when people are so passionately hateful of roughly half of America, I ask how this can possibly be constructive. I also ask if a president like Sanders or Warren can heal this problem of polarization and hatred? I really don't see it. These candidates are popular specifically because they have "fought" for so long against the conservative enemy that people are the left is so in love with hatred. They have gained popularity partly because they talk about economic inequality but also because they have fanned the flames of hatred for one half of the country against the other. I don't see that as a winning scenario.
When I see Andrew Yang talk, I notice none of this rally to fight against anyone. I hear about policies, solutions that address issues that matter to me, economic inequality, poverty, technology and our human future. I hear him talk of a vision for the human race that is a "Star-Trek economy" where people are not required to work at a job to justify their right to exist, but instead people are guaranteed a baseline to meet their needs as a right of citizenship. Energies can be spent on bettering one's self and doing what one is passionate about. This is the vision of the future to fight for. It is worth all of us spending our entire lives fighting for, regardless if any of us ever see the fruits of that fight. That is the vision. It is a futuristic vision, not a nostalgic vision, looking back to some idealistic version of the 1950s when every American had a good factory job and could afford to have 2.5 kids with a good union job.
Yang's main slogans are "Humanity First" and "It isn't left or right, it's Forward". Notice it is "Humanity" first, not some tired rhetoric about the middle class. This is what the Universal Basic Income achieves. Universal Basic Income was something that Bernie was in support of until the very moment that Yang started running and all of a sudden Bernie abandoned the idea, claiming in a fatherly way "we are not going to do that". Instead, Bernie proposed the Guaranteed Federal Jobs program directly to shoot down UBI. What will that program do to help an artist like myself? I have all but given up on my dream of art and work at a call center because 'the market' has decided my art to be of no value in actual dollars. And Bernie's solution? A few extra dollars an hour at my call center job (soon to be automated). If I become unemployed, I can do artwork? No, "We need road workers, child-care workers, our bridges are crumbling, a job supplied by the government for every American who wants to work". I am insulted by the idea.
As for healing the country, and doing so while also defeating Trump:
"It isn't left or right, it's Forward", Yang can do both of these things in a way, I don't see coming from Bernie or Warren. At the last debate the candidates were asked "Who is a friend you have that people might be surprised about?" Yang began talking about "Fred" the trucker. Fred Ramsey is one of my friend's on Facebook and is an ex-Trump supporter who has voted republican all of his life. He has now switched his party to democrat to vote for Yang. Fred has made many videos about how because of Yang, he has learned "it isn't immigrants taking our jobs, it is automation". Fred talks about how he began to realize that every human deserves a basic standard of living via the UBI. This is a conservative who is now spouting human rights and equality for all. All the while, so many of my so called 'progressive' friends and family members have come out against UBI and begun reverting to 'work ethic' mantras. I am on 5 or 6 different social media YangGang groups where I see thousands of comments from Yang supporters and the story is the same over and over, Trump supporters and conservatives who have realized that anti-immigrant fear is not needed, that the UBI can be a right for all Americans, regardless of work status, that no one needs to live in poverty and struggle- right along with the tens of thousands of democrats, progressives and socialist-leaning Yang supporters. There is no shame, no hatred in the Yang Gang. We all want Humanity to move forward with automation and UBI. There are no human enemies or the fanning the flames of hatred toward half the country.
10/28/2019
"The only candidate that represents the poor and working classes is Bernie Sanders."
This is a false statement. What policies does Bernie have to help the homeless and unemployed (the actual poor)? Why did Bernie flip flop and abandon true humanitarian values via the Universal Basic income? Policies that stress the need for people to work in order to justify their right to exist are capitalist under a thin mask. No one can claim to care about the poor and homeless and also be against the Universal Basic income. I am sick of "work ethic" rhetoric. "Bernie has been saying the same thing for 40 years." Untrue, but also insufficient. The world has changed in 40 years, the world has changed in ten years. We need modern solutions that the old have shown they are not willing to provide. To be ruled over by well meaning people in their 70's who cannot keep up with the times, who cannot boldly face the changing reality of poverty and the modern world as a whole is unacceptable.
As an actual "poor person", unlike the vast majority of Bernie supporters (middle class and above), I will not let this go. Universal Basic Income is the only policy that recognizes the rights of citizens simply for being alive, SEPARATE from a "job". The time has come for this idea. I have no respect for a politician who does not support Universal Basic Income. How can anyone sit in their luxury home, ride their airplanes, live their comfortable lives and be against this idea? To ideologically tie a basic standard of living to a job is not radical or egalitarian.
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Warren at 4th debate on UBI vs her SS plan
Here is my thought about something that Elizabeth Warren said to Andrew Yang at the debate:
Warren said:
"I understand that what we are all looking for is how we strengthen America's middle class and actually I think the thing closest to the Universal Basic Income is Social Security. It is one of the reasons that I have put forward a plan to extend the solvency of Social Security by decades... It also has a provision for your wife, for those who stay home to do care-giving, for children or for seniors and creates an opportunity for them to get credit on their Social Security. So AFTER a lifetime of hard work, people are entitled to retire with dignity. I see this as an important question but I just want to understand the data on this."
First of all,
"I understand that what we are all looking for is how we strengthen America's middle class..."
No, we are not ALL looking for how to strengthen the middle class. There are many of us in America who are not part of the middle class and never have been. Many of us live at or directly close to the poverty line. We are sick of hearing the religious rhetoric about the holy "middle class". The reason there is such an interest and passion for Universal Basic Income is precisely because it helps ALL people. It is the fist proposal that looks beyond class and instead helps people because we are human. This is what people like Warren and other established democrats fail to grasp. We are moving toward a world where human value must be recognized separate from class or work status.
Secondly,
" It (Warren's plan for Social Security) also has a provision for your wife, for those who stay home to do care-giving...
This is in response to Yang's statement about Universal Basic Income, how it rewards unrecognized work, like the work his wife is doing, taking care of his 2 children, "one of whom is autistic".
So Warren is claiming that people doing such stay-at-home parenting and care-giving work will be compensated later when they retire and collect Social Security. Now picture a parent who is struggling. What will help them and the quality of life of the child? An extra $1000 a month right now, or some compensation for their struggles, 20, 30 or 40 years later when they retire? The answer seems obvious to me.
Monday, September 9, 2019
Monday, July 22, 2019
Saturday, June 29, 2019
UBI as transition to RBE
An RBE is certainly the goal and UBI is an important step towards getting there. It isn't really so much about the amount,$1000 a month. UBI does something far more important that I have almost never heard talked about. Our current system depends upon the idea that you have to "earn" your right to exist. If you do not have money, be it inherited, worked for, stolen or otherwise, then you might as well die. This is the complete opposite of the basic RBE train of thought. Changing this fundamental thing that capitalism depends on is the number one first step towards the RBE. I really feel that as long as that simple fact of capitalism remains, we will not make progress to the RBE.
"If you do not have or 'earn' money, you have no actual right to live".
This is like a primary line of code at the heart of the global operating system we live in. UBI erases that one simple line of code, changes it to:
"You have value because you are human. You have the right to exist because you exist."
This is important on an epic level! This is the thing I urge everyone who craves for the better world to grasp. It is not a small thing and needs to be understood. It is not so much about the dollar amount (although that also matters). It is more about changing the story that capitalism requires for its survival.
NAC 6/29/2019
"If you do not have or 'earn' money, you have no actual right to live".
This is like a primary line of code at the heart of the global operating system we live in. UBI erases that one simple line of code, changes it to:
"You have value because you are human. You have the right to exist because you exist."
This is important on an epic level! This is the thing I urge everyone who craves for the better world to grasp. It is not a small thing and needs to be understood. It is not so much about the dollar amount (although that also matters). It is more about changing the story that capitalism requires for its survival.
NAC 6/29/2019
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
UBI and environmental consumption
ANON-
"I love the fact that people are waking up to the #FreedomDividend and how great it will be for the country, but I hope it doesn't fuel more excessive consumption of cheap products that are not good for the environment. Is there an angle to work with here so people would, ideally, use their dividend responsibly?"
Neil Adam Collins It seems like there is an assumption here hidden in this worry. The hidden assumption is that if people don't have the Freedom Dividend, the $1000 a month, if things stay as they are, without UBI, with a large group in poverty THEN... the environment will be better off, that the environment will be ok. So, is people being poor and struggling... is that the thing that is protecting the environment right now??
I don't think it is. I think that the things which are really destroying the environment are on a scale larger than what the average and below average income person would effect if they had $1000 a month. If we care about the environment we will have to realize that the consumption habits of the average consumer is a very small part of the problem.
The vastly larger harm done to the environment lies in the choices of industry, the way mining and logging is done, the way products are made, the way they are packaged, the way they are shipped back and forth around the world, the massive pollution caused by cruise ships, by the excessive air travel of the wealthy who fly around the world many times a year for business or vacation etc... These structural decisions, economic decisions are made by governments and corporations on gigantic global scales. Yet the average person is busy worrying about how to recycle an extra can or use a couple less plastic straws a week. I can't help think this way of thinking, of putting all the blame into the mind of the small time consumer is a smokescreen.
Milton Fang
Yang proposes a UBI to solve a basic problem, a transitional shift from manual labor to automation and AI. This constantly has devolved to what will people spend UBI on or will they decide to be lazy or what not. Yang believes that it really does not matter what people spend their UBI on at this point. I don't think he believe UBI will solve all the problems in the world, but it's gotta start by solving some basic problems. So by providing UBI, this solves some basic problems in 3 folds. 1 - it gives everyone a floor so that our moral basis is covered (over population / consumption is an entirely other issue that needs to be tackled). 2 - it provides for a more equalized say/participation in capitalism (and eventually when the people/government is the largest capital holder as they should be, corporations will naturally need defer to the people/customer). 3 - get people's minds off economic survival, and into larger issues like climate crisis, over consumption, moral values, and start putting human intellect and ingenuity to solve future problems, instead of wasting it on present woes.(Notice point about "Scarcity mindset".)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)