Why the world should adopt a basic income

The price would be what?

 

you mean left wing. Right wing is for limited govt a dictator is for unlimited govt. 1+1=2

 

I guess you'd have to guess at the exchange rate

 

exchange of what? an ounce of silver is an ounce of silver.

 

would you have law that any currency would have to be backed by an exact amount of silver and not gold?

 

No, I would allow the free market to determine the optimum money. I'm not a libcommienazi.

 

"Most South American dictatorships during the second half of the 20th century were right-wing: Pinochet, the Brazilian Military Government, etc. There have also been a number of military dictatorships installed by anti-communists which were generally conservative and rightist."

Some confusion of terms? (I note Longshot referring to you as a libcomnazi…)

 

You mean - over all of us?

A sensible question.

The answer might be found in answering this question:
Are their sufficient resources on earth to guarantee sustainable above poverty level participation by all, in the economy? MMT says yes.

 

so what? redistribution just puts more on welfare and creates more poverty and less productivity. China just eliminated 40% of all the planets poverty with Republican capitalism, not Nazi MMT redistribution.Do you understand?

 

dear a dictatorship is left wing. HItler Stalin Mao were for big govt. How is it possible that you haven;t learned this lesson yet?

 

and if you had 7000 currencies like before what would you do??

 

a debit card is plastic not silver!!

 

I love the way you define terms to suit your narrative.

"Most South American dictatorships during the second half of the 20th century were right-wing...."

This is the accepted usage of these terms.

Carry on..

 

This is a strange view.

We agree there are sufficient resources on earth to eliminate poverty.

So we a have a systems problem, not a lack of resources problem.

In fact, MMT minimises redistribution (via taxation) in favour of guaranteed above-poverty participation, whether in the private or public sector, by means of managed public sector money printing operating alongside competitive private sector activity.

Your preference for the wars, poverty, starvation - and walls - that result from unmanaged competition ( which you call "freedom") is an graphic indication of the triumph of your reptilian and mammalian brains over your cerebral cortex ("thinking brain").

 

you mean if violent govt redistributes at gunpoint?? Even if govt could without a violent counter attack it would make problem far worse since it would discourage everyone from working. This is MMT killed 120 million in USSR and Red China. Do you understand?

 

again you are assuming no violent counter attack as violent liberal govt steal people's money through inflation.

 

what?? China just switched to capitalism from MMT communism and instantly eliminated 40% of all the planets poverty after 60 million starved to death. You are not on this side of sanity. Sorry to rock your world. Trump has made liberals crazy. We now have the Communist MMT and the Nazi Green New Deal?

 

I understand I'm communicating with your reptilian and mammalian brains:

eg "This is MMT killed 120 million in USSR and Red China".

Carry on...

 

Deserves an answer (since some of your cortex brain is working here, with regard to the concern about inflation):

No inflation, because MMT ensures no excess draw on scarce resources.

 

current system produces no inflation so same money supply in each case??

 

Yes MMT is just another deadly liberal big govt scheme like HItler Stalin and Mao used. Now you know why our genius founders were for freedom, not big govt schemes.

 

accepted on left you mean so all dictators are not liberals. For 99th time: our conservative founders were geniuses for freedom from govt. Liberals Nazis socialists kings dictators fascists are for govt and against freedom. Do you understand now?

 

In MMT, resources are more important than money - money can be created to ensure maximum sustainable resource development (including labour), something the private market can only periodically achieve (as will be proved when the next recession arrives) . In MMT you can increase the amount of money in the economy without causing inflation, if any increase in resource consumption is directed to areas of underutilisation. [Though it probably is best to look at the globe as a single economy].

A view of the "current system" (looking at the latest statistics):

"Exploding trade deficit. Exploding national debt. Auto sales slow down. Housing sales slow down. Spanky's doing a bang up job . . . if you buy distressed properties like Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, known in his industry as a vulture capitalist. He even looks like a vulture."

and then there's underemployment:

Underemployment Takes An Outsized Toll On The Economy, According To A New Study

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksh...conomy-according-to-a-new-study/#7f2b2dbe234e

....how wonderful your "freedom" is!

 

Actually....... I do rather like the idea but I think that some aspects of our history need to be looked at more objectively before we will know how to finance this without raising taxes.




Can we learn about the Washington Swamp from the Ottawa Swamp?


Here are the statistics for deaths among African Americans since 1973:
Abortion............15.5 million
Heart disease.....2,715, 416
Cancer ...............2,568,040
Accidents ..............447,803
Violent crimes .......354,392
AIDS .....................245,322


(Roe vs Wade..... 1973)......


Look what happened in 1974 after the stage was set in Ottawa, Canada:





My guess is that he was pressured into doing this so that the same thing could be
arranged in the USA:

 

YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH!

Yes, we can!

I don't know what you mean by the "Ottawa Swamp". The percentage of GDP in Canada that goes to Heath Care is lower than that of the US because you have a better healthcare system funded by the Canadian Government*. Any healthcare system that is privatized is far too expensive and the US is living proof of that fact!

Have a look at the OECD comparative healthcare cost study here (Expenditure in dollars per country-population):
Canada - $4826
USA - $10029

The US is twice that of Canada on a per capita (per person) basis! If you want a real "healthcare swamp" with professional alligators, come south !!!!

*That does not spend half its Discretionary Budget on Defense as does the US! Where you are getting Screwed Royally in Canada is in post-secondary education costs! From here:
- excerpt:

Were your kids in school in France, they'd be paying no more than $1000 per child (plus Room&Board) as mine did. (As I never tire of saying - since the war in Vietnam - "Guns or butter because you can't have both!?!")