UBI → UBM

Recently, The Portly Politico wrote a short piece entitled “Fast Food Premium” about Universal Basic Income (UBI) and some of what is grossly wrong with this particular Leftist idea.

There’s been a lot of discussion of UBI—Universal Basic Income—over the last few years, especially with the presidential primary run of Andrew Yang.  The concept is seductive in its simplicity:  gut the welfare state and its behemoth apparatus of bureaucratic pencil pushers and middlemen, and just cut every adult citizen a monthly check.

For fiscal conservatives, it’s a particularly toothsome Devil’s Bargain:  streamline an inefficient and wasteful bureaucracy and simply direct deposit a grand every month into Americans’ checking accounts.  Of course, it’s a siren song:  we’d just get the payments and still suffer from an entrenched bureaucracy, claiming $1000 a month isn’t enough to meet the specialized needs of whatever community they pretend to support.

Even if the deal were struck and every redundant welfare program was eliminated, there UBI would still be a bad idea.  Besides the absurdity of merely paying people to exist, it’s inherently inflationary:  if you give everyone $1000 a month, prices are going to go up.  Just as college tuition has soared because universities realized they could jack up the price and federal loans would expand to cover the costs, UBI would cause a similar rise in prices.  Sure, it’d be great at first, but the inflationary effects would kick in quickly.

— The Portly Politico
Fast Food Premium

Rather than comment on his post directly, I’ve chosen to put my thoughts out here, both to boost the signal of his post and to avoid clogging up his post with TLDR commenting and bringing in tangential and barely tangential facts and predictions to his discussion.

My Thoughts On His Post and Premise

He right; UBI is prima facie very seductive to those who want to increase efficiency and decrease the size of the federal government’s payroll. He’s also right in his allusion to the fact that such an improvement is unlikely in the extreme to happen. The realities of the Deep State’s power, the issues involved in putting a significant number of federal workers onto the unemployment rolls, and many of the several States each likely deciding that they need more than the proposed $1000 per month per person, all indicate that there would be little, if any, streamlining of the federal bureaucracy.

I also agree that UBI would be inherently inflationary. Any time you inject “free” money into an economic system, inflation will be the result. This is especially true when it’s perceived as a stable, recurring injection of said money.

Finally, I agree that UBI would devastate the many industries that rely upon – and are to some extent relied upon by – the unskilled, lowest tier of workers inside our borders, e.g., the fast food industry that was his example.

I disagree, however, that this would be simply a Direct Deposit of monies into people’s bank accounts. Even today, most form of government “largess” are offered through debit cards managed by various third-party firms who make a great deal of money off of proving that service. There’s just too many of the same sorts who have issues with Voter IDs who “need” that sort of card vs. having a banking account of some sort.

UBI - You All Get "Free" Money, No Effort Needed
UBI – You All Get “Free” Money, No Effort Needed

My Thoughts On Near-Term UBI

My first thought is that this very much wouldn’t be a replacement program in the near term. UBI, along with “free” college, pay per baby birthed (I believe this will be expanded and made more direct than the current refundable tax credit), and other subsidies will simply be added to the billions of dollars the federal government hands out as subsidies to the “poor” every year. I firmly believe that, if UBI is enacted, it will be an addition, not a replacement, to the current subsidies collectively referred to a “Safety Net.”

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!

— President Ronald Reagan (Bl. 😉 )

No, my guess would be the only part of the “Safety Net” that might be removed (after a one-time, lump-sum payout) as redundant is Social Security (SSI), which is a largely worker-funded program that has been an issue for the government – as well as a cash cow – for some time now.

My second thought is that this, like minimum wage, unemployment, and a plethora of other nationwide programs, will actually increase the inefficiencies and sizes of state and local governments. After all, $1000 doesn’t go nearly as far in Manhattan, NY as it does in Gering, Ne. Hence, the more costly, Democrat-controlled states and localities will do whatever they can to get significantly (200% or more in some cases) increased UBI stipends.

Hellfire! That’s not even ridiculous or grafting. Just taking into account rent, there’s a huge difference. Apartments in Manhattan average costing 680% ($3670 vs. $540) of what they do in Gering. Other costs are similarly different. It would just make sense for NY politicians to demand more UBI money per resident, especially since UBI wouldn’t be means-tested in any way.

My third and final thought is that the proposed $1000 per month federal subsidy would only be the starting point. It would dramatically increase relatively quickly as increasing the monthly stipend would become a key campaign promise, especially for Democrat candidates.

Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) – America’s only long term experiment with any form or level of UBI and Mike Dunleavy landslide victory in the 2018 Alaska gubernatorial election after he promised to increase the PFD payout by more than 600% of the then-current payout and over 300% of the original payout, rather proves that point.

My Longer-Term Predictions: UBI → UBM

In the longer-term, I predict that, if UBI is enacted upon America by the Democrats now or in the near future, it will over the course of some amount of time morph into Universal Basic Maintenance (UBM), with specific subsidies, services, and products replacing all or most of the cash payout. The negative synergy between the Republicans’ desire to not spend taxpayers’ money on frivolous or immoral things and the Democrats’ ideology of benevolent tyranny, pretty much guarantees this, as do all the politicians’ perfectly logical desires for increased control over the populace.

So, those UBI monies that bureaucrats think would or should be spent upon food will, at some point, be replaced by actual, preselected, “appropriate” foodstuffs either available for pickup at government or government-authorized locations or delivered to people’s homes.

Remember, President Trump already floated this idea as a change in SNAP, and the only real reason Democrats lambasted it was that President Trump was the one putting it forth.

Similarly, I’d expect some hybrid of government credit system in POS’s for durable goods, e.g., toilet paper and cleaning supplies and home deliveries of the same to replace that expected portion of the UBI cash payout.

Rent could and might well be handled similarly to how NYC’s rent control works, with the landlords receiving federal monies but being required by fiat to limit their rents to a pre-specified level – a portion of the future iteration of the UBM program that they may not be allowed to opt-out of in most cases.

And, of course, even if healthcare doesn’t get moved to a fully government-controlled single-payer model, that portion of each person’s UBI allotment would likely end up under UBM being placed directly by the government into that person’s Health Savings Account (HSA). Additionally, the government will probably at that point completely control how much medical professionals and institutions can charge for individual procedures and medications.

Yes, my predictions is that UBI will mutated into UBM, a para-utero to grave support and control system ran by the government, without the need for- or use of money by the residents of the nation for their basic needs as defined by our government.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

African↮Americans

Just another screaming, angry buck nigger

A real issue with those Blacks who identify as “African-American” is the punctuation involved. The hyphen is wrong and should be used. The grammatical/logical symbol that should be separating “African” from “American” is ↮ the symbol for contradiction or an XOR value choice. This is especially true because the etymological root of “contradiction” is the Latin contradico, “speak against.”

(Contradiction, Opposition, Antithesis, Exclusive Choice)

The sad fact of it is that they’re either Black/African or they’re American. At best, and that best is vanishingly rare, it’s a sliding scale between being part of their people or part ours. They can’t be both because Blacks – those acknowledged by their own people as being Black Enough and not an American, e.g., those derided as being Oreos and/or Uncle Toms/ Aunt Jemimas – hate America and her people. And, you can’t be a true member of a people and/or nation while holding it to be utterly evil, loathsome, and the existential enemy of “your people.”

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

All Those “Silly” Fears

Klugman - Dangerous Idiot
Finally admits he was dead wrong on globalism

Paul Klugman, Nobel laureate economist, and deeply entrenched and enriched pundit has always been an arrogant git who loved to lambast and excoriate any critics of globalism – what his school of economics called “Global Capitalism” – as fools and their fears as silly. His position, defended from on high, was that we should not worry about it. He said that unrestricted trade will have, at the very most, only a very minor negative impact on our people’s prosperity and posterity.

Well, that was then and this is now. Klugman has finally admitted that the large number of people whom he thought didn’t understand macroeconomics very well and who were silly were right and he and his fellow Globalist Keynesians were utterly and totally wrong.

To make a long and convoluted story short and – possibly overly – simple: Despite vast numbers of people warning otherwise, Klugman and his fellow travelers both fervently believed that manufacturing moving to Third World nations, e.g., China, would perforce raise wages in those countries, thereby raising the costs of the manufactured goods close enough to those domestically produced so as not to upheave the market greatly. They also grossly underestimated how much and how often corporations would take advantage of both the amazingly low-cost labor pools and tax benefits of such off-shored manufacturing.

In other words, Klugman and Co. arrogantly derided those people who warned them of what globalism would cause and they were completely wrong in doing so. Those “silly” fears turned out to be not so silly after all.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

NBC Today

NBC Today
NBC Today

One could probably substitute any channel’s “news” group meeting for NBC’s Today Show and be accurate enough for everyday use. They’ve all, except for Fox News, lost the trust and the viewership of both Americans and the Democrats, and they seem to choose to double-down on Leftist, anti-Trump editorializing instead of correct their behavior.

Ah well; stupid should be painful and they’ve collectively been grossly stupid. They went full-on Libtard – one should never go full-on Libtard 😆 – and threw away the trust and viewership of the American people, leaving stuck with pandering to the Left in order to stay afloat. And the Left? They’re deep into decompensation these days, demanding more extremity, more hate, and more explicit compliance with the “orthodox dogma” of their cult.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | |

Barr’s Congessional Hearing

Barr’s Congressional Hearing

The one image and caption which most aptly sums up Barr’s hearing before the Democrat-controlled the House Judiciary Committee. ↑ And yes, the Dems behave that poorly – so poorly that even CNN called them out on it.

Tags: | | | | | | | |