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: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

What’s Actually Wrong

What's Actually Wrong In America
What’s Actually Wrong In America

The above cartoon is a nigh-on perfect, and perfectly sarcastic, example of what is actually wrong in America today. In the minds of far too many nothing is exempt from political meaning and allegiance. Nothing.

True, it is far more prevalent among Democrats and their sort with their hate-filled #CancelCulture and TURDS, but Americans these days are prone to the problem as well, just not as much or to the extent that the Left is.

It’s all a sure sign that the government is too big, too invasive, and far too pervasive. It’s also a sign that the 24/7 fake news cycle is pernicious and a clear and present danger to the health of the People and the Nation.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

If People Were Told …

If People Were Told ...
If People Were Told …

While I’m not against all, or even most, of the initial responses to COVID-19, the blind, slavish, eagerness that a lot people showed towards following what were quite destructive and draconian quarantine measures is quite disturbing. Not surprising, but quite disturbing.

And the way you jumped on the social engineering point of this all being to protect others instead of ourselves and branded any dissenters as public enemies, was and is even more disturbing.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

Obama Knows Best?

Obama Knows Best - Moochelle's views on the Presidency and the People
Obama Knows Best?

In the same hour-long “exit interview” with Oprah Winfrey in which Michelle Obama lamented that Donald Trump’s election victory stole all hope from those demographics Michelle and Barack support, enable, and pander to she also had some “interesting” things to say about the role of the POTUS, specifically her husband’s role in that office.

He and I and so many believe that – what else do you have if you don’t have hope? What do you give your kids if you can’t give them hope?

I feel Barack has been that for the nation in ways that people will come to appreciate. Having a grown-up in the White House who can say to you in times of crisis and turmoil, ‘Hey, it’s going to be okay. Let’s remember the good things that we have.’

— Michelle Obama

Michelle has now voiced and interesting and quite telling opinion. Then, stress and/or tragedy tend to lower one’s inhibitions and cause the truth of what one is and one believes to come out into the light. And of course, the truth of Michelle and her beliefs are rather repugnant to the American people and much more than a little hypocritical coming from her.

The State Is Mother, The State Is Father

You can’t get past the fact that if Obama is “grown-up in the White House,” then we, the People are children – often unruly, needy children – in Michelle’s mind. That’s not just insulting; it’s downright dangerous because that the mindset that empowers the nanny state and leads to the most pernicious and persistent forms of despotism.

In the outgoing FLOTUS’ defense, if one looks at many of her husband’s constituency, the idea that they are unruly, needy children who desperately require and demand parental guidance and attention is not too far-fetched. If, as is likely given her history, Michelle bases her opinion of Americans on them, it’s understandable that she would believe they need the State as mother and father. They obviously need something by way of aid and comfort.

The problem, however, is it is the same sort of failed parenting that produced these snowflakes that is exemplified by the majority of Liberal social policies. As such, this is not a philosophy that can be allowed to take hold in our national discourse.

So Very Offensively Insensitive

Still, Michelle’s rare, honest views are not without their humor or, at the very least, delicious irony. Looking at them from the borrowed viewpoint of many of her husband’s constituency, they’re very offensively insensitive to the experiences and narratives of both Blacks and Womyn.

Given that in any given year in recent memory 66% – 75% of Black offspring do not a have a father in residence, bastardy having become their cultural since the “success” of the 1950s – 1960s “Civil Rights” movement, the FLOTUS’ casual normification and valorization of a father figure is at best racially tone deaf and at worst an endorsement of White Privilege and a tacit remonstration of Black Culture.

Similarly, Michelle’s comment could quite easily be considered as horrifically offensive and insensitive to the plight of the current wave of Feminist womyn inside America’s borders. With the FLOTUS essentially casting Obama in Robert Young’s role, it would seem that she has normalized the “Patriarchy” with Obama being the wise and caring father figure and the head of the should that America represents to Michelle.

Pretty much, if she wasn’t the First Black First Lady she would have been excoriated for this lament with its insensitivity to the special needs of much of her husband’s constituency. But then, her husband enjoyed similar leniency throughout his tenure because he was a Black.

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

Bernie’s True Platform

While it certainly matters whether or not Bernie Sanders wins the Democrats’ nomination for POTUS, what matters more is his platform upon which he’s running for office.

bernie-fist

Bernie’s True Platform
(Click to Enlarge)

And, when you boil it all down, this is Bernie’s true platform. The State is Mother; the State is Father; the State is God.

How could it be otherwise? Bernie’s an openly admitted Socialist and Socialism as it is enacted as opposed to it’s academic definition requires the State to have total control over every individual from cradle to grave. As it requires total control by the State over all facets of people’s lives, Socialism can’t allow any authority by family or faith unless that authority is merely a proxy for itself.

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