Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Follies

People creating the wealth will just stop creating the wealth? Hmm...you should tell that to the oil companies in Alaska. They are still there after 40 years of a form of UBI, the Alaska Permanent Fund, the closest thing to a UBI experiment we have in the United States.

There are other arguments against UBI, but people just not creating wealth anymore isn't one of them.

Quote: Tripdufan

People creating the wealth will just stop creating the wealth? Hmm...you should tell that to the oil companies in Alaska. They are still there after 40 years of a form of UBI, the Alaska Permanent Fund, the closest thing to a UBI experiment we have in the United States.

There are other arguments against UBI, but people just not creating wealth anymore isn't one of them.

Not a valid example. The AK fund is a lease payment, which oil companies pay anywhere unless they own the land. They rarely own the land and pay at least 1/8 of production in lease payments.

Nice try.

Quote: Tripdufan

People creating the wealth will just stop creating the wealth? Hmm...you should tell that to the oil companies in Alaska. They are still there after 40 years of a form of UBI, the Alaska Permanent Fund, the closest thing to a UBI experiment we have in the United States.

There are other arguments against UBI, but people just not creating wealth anymore isn't one of them.

The permanent fund in Ak., and the Teamsters retirement fund around Hoffa both prove the same thing. No one can be within easy reach of a billion dollars and not dip their hands in it.

Quote: Evenbob

This is an old concept. For centuries
artists were subsidized by rich patrons
while they produced their art. But the
caveat was, they had to have actual
talent first. They didn't just declare
themselves an artist and some rich
old lady gave them money.

Thing is today people demand to "pursue their dreams" while someone else pay for it.

Quote: Tripdufan

People creating the wealth will just stop creating the wealth? Hmm...you should tell that to the oil companies in Alaska. They are still there after 40 years of a form of UBI, the Alaska Permanent Fund, the closest thing to a UBI experiment we have in the United States.

There are other arguments against UBI, but people just not creating wealth anymore isn't one of them.

AK conservatives love the oil dividend.

And, people say there is not an example in America...

You are right nobody claims wealth from nothing, it's all about redistributing properly, by taxing tech, and data taxes, VAT taxes, etc...

Quote: Gandler

AK conservatives love the oil dividend.

And, people say there is not an example in America...

You are right nobody claims wealth from nothing, it's all about redistributing properly, by taxing tech, and data taxes, VAT taxes, etc...

You really do not get the difference, do you?

The oil belongs to the State of AK. AK has decided that it's citizens should share in that wealth. When an oil company leases land to drill, they pay a royalty. Instead of letting the money go into the black hole of government, it distributes the royalty to the people directly.

It is NOT a handout.
It is NOT redistributed wealth.
It is NOT an example of UBI. In fact, it goes up and down with the price of oil.

UBI supporters think wealth comes from nothing. They do not understand that their UBI will be more than eaten up as prices and taxes go up.

THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH.

Quote: AZDuffman

You really do not get the difference, do you?

The oil belongs to the State of AK. AK has decided that it's citizens should share in that wealth. When an oil company leases land to drill, they pay a royalty. Instead of letting the money go into the black hole of government, it distributes the royalty to the people directly.

It is NOT a handout.
It is NOT redistributed wealth.
It is NOT an example of UBI. In fact, it goes up and down with the price of oil.

UBI supporters think wealth comes from nothing. They do not understand that their UBI will be more than eaten up as prices and taxes go up.

THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH.

UBI supporters DO NOT THINK wealth comes from nothing!!!!! STOP SAYING THAT!!!!! They just will take wealth created by me and those like me (workers) and give it to those that don't work! You can call it stealing; I call it taxation. I AGREE with you that it is not sustainable, and it is WRONG on a prima facie basis.

And I AGREE with you that the Alaska example is an embarrassing attempt to show an analogy showing successful UBI. The liberals just cannot fathom a government not wanting to keep its paws on every dollar it has!!!!

Quote: AZDuffman

You really do not get the difference, do you?

The oil belongs to the State of AK. AK has decided that it's citizens should share in that wealth. When an oil company leases land to drill, they pay a royalty. Instead of letting the money go into the black hole of government, it distributes the royalty to the people directly.

It is NOT a handout.
It is NOT redistributed wealth.
It is NOT an example of UBI. In fact, it goes up and down with the price of oil.

UBI supporters think wealth comes from nothing. They do not understand that their UBI will be more than eaten up as prices and taxes go up.

THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH.

Every Example is not a valid example. I guess the largest state is America is too small of a sample size?


Yeah, prices will go up with a VAT tax. But, the vast majority of Americans will see a net benifit. Only, those in the top tax bracket may see a decrease.....

UBI has been proposed in the past by leading federal land, leasing drilling rights in U.S. waters, etc.... But, this is unlikely on the Federal Level. The fact is we will need taxed (VAT at the very least) to fund UBI.

In AK oil dividend levels (vary drastically year from year) has no effect on employment or education, people still are motivated to work and study.

Quote: Gandler

But, the vast majority of Americans will see a net benifit. .

Yeah, no..

1. VAT's are hugely regressive, with the cost falling mostly on the poor.

2. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to eliminate the IRS and the income tax system in the U.S., so the VAT will be just another tax imposed on the American people.
.
3. VAT calculations would be terribly costly to businesses, which would have to calculate VAT on every product, at every step of the process. These costs, of course, would be passed on to consumers, along with the VAT rates.

4. The biggest problem with VAT is it discourages govt's from reining in wasteful spending and encourages them to spend even more. This is counterproductive.

That's just a few of the drawbacks.

Quote: Evenbob

Yeah, no..

1. VAT's are hugely regressive, with the cost falling mostly on the poor.

2. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to eliminate the IRS and the income tax system in the U.S., so the VAT will be just another tax imposed on the American people.
.
3. VAT calculations would be terribly costly to businesses, which would have to calculate VAT on every product, at every step of the process. These costs, of course, would be passed on to consumers, along with the VAT rates.

4. The biggest problem with VAT is it discourages govt's from reining in wasteful spending and encourages them to spend even more. This is counterproductive.

That's just a few of the drawbacks.

Yeah, the idea is to add the VAT in addition to income tax, not to replace it....

A good example is Australia in the 2000s, when a VAT was added in addition to income tax to increase government benfiits and services. Australia is one of the countries we need to model.