I know someone on UBI , he isn’t exactly payed, he has his housing and food provided for him. He doesn’t drive nor own a car, lives within walking distance of everything he needs , and apart from the marginal income he scrapes together taking online surveys and selling items online has no margin. He has enough to eat but is still Loosing weight because his food supply is unappealing. His health is not optimal dispute being able to and even necessarily walking to get the necessities of life. And he is deeply depressed. His life is only marginally different from a prison inmate. This is the modern welfare system under a different name.
That is not UBI. That is welfare, it is meant to help struggling people along, not replace income. This one person being to lazy to do better his own situation does not mean we should discount a system which could be a safety net for millions of people in need. Many of those are hard working people who had a bad turn.
@@holdensukut1989 The real beneficiaries of the Welfare system are the govt employees who do the means testing. In Finland it was the govt employees who against UBI because they knew that their job would be eliminated. UBI => give money directly to the people, Welfare => most of the money goes to the govt workers administering the Welfare.
I used to believe in UBI. Then I experienced a mini version of it. I was being paid the same as slackers at work, because the boss 'felt bad' about giving raises and promotions to select few who actually deserved it. So when one brilliant worker got a raise everyone else got a raise. What happened was slackers started slacking more because they justified their behavior as legit, and actually started becoming aggressive to hard workers. Their entire agenda was to bring down hard workers because it was an eye sore to them. They disliked being reminded of their slacking. What's more, slackers create their own hierarchy because things get kushy. At the end of the day, no body gets work done and everyone becomes enemy to everyone. It's a huge huge financial and ethical damage on the company and everyone's career.
Thats not UBI, UBI is a floor not a ceiling. In this case, its a ceiling, you are not rewarded for being more productive. In the case of UBI, its a floor. A bum without a job will get at least $12,000 a year but that doesn't mean we all can make only that much. We are still free to make more. Most people actually pay more than $12,000 in taxes, fees, and fines. So in these cases, its just a tax refund. We also pay more for things that the government imposes like car insurance. Basically, the government forcing us to pay somebody else. Education for some professions because you have to be licensed by the state therefore must go through required schooling else no job (essentially an imposition). Healthcare, because doctors have to be licensed and hospitals have to be regulated, which increase private costs. Housing. Zoning, parking requirements, set backs, building codes. All of these add costs to housing which is reflected in housing prices, rents, and mortgages.
Ya you have a point. I still support UBI because it's way cheaper than all the crime and expensive hospital stays of people on the street. California pays 7 billion on the homeless problem and it's worse than ever, but that cost taxpayers $40,000 a year per homeless person. that does not include the cost of crime etc.. so giving them $12000 is a huge savings.
@@rifz42that's not how that works. UBI is what we saw in 2020,everyone got money. Then the inflation hit, exactly as predicted. Give everyone $1k a month and inflation will rise to strip that money off its buying power. Incidentally, minimum wage does the same thing. No matter how high minimum wage is, since it's the economic floor, the rest of the economy must inflate accordingly, which is why everyone on minimum wage is poor. UBI will just grossly exaccerbate inflation and if the government tries to compensate by increasing UBI distributions, the economy will go into a hyper inflation feed back loop.
I was traveling around China 15 years ago. They were harvesting rice in Yunan province. Cut by hand, tied in bundles to dry, then threshed either by hand or small machines that they moved by hand around the fields. I asked why they don't just buy a combined harvester to save all that labour. The answer was that if they sat around doing nothing, they'd just cause trouble, so give them something to do that is useful.
@@ClarkPotter If you can't see the relevance to the contents of the interview, then you have a problem. The Chinese authorities are smarter than you, obviously.
UBI would make people dependent on the government at a level we've never seen. And that income could be denied as way of shutting down the voices of anyone critical of the government or their preferred narrative. It would enslave huge percentages of the population.
That's why they keep pushing it. They just imported millions of potential beneficiaries who will either stir havok or stay shut for as long as the checks keeps coming in.
I believe you are correct, but is there an alternative? Technology is increasing at a rate that is leaving millions so far behind they have zero skills to work in a new economy and/or they will not be needed anyway due to massive increases in automation. What are the consequences of ignoring them? I don't have the answers to serious problems on the horizon. Has anyone asked AI what to do?
But the system is already setup so that we are very dependent on the government already . We are giving 40% of our revenue to taxes and you guys are worried about ubi calling it communism ? What do you call taking 40% away of someone’s income ? Flash report ,America never had taxes before the 1900 . Can you guess where your tax money is going to ? And you don’t call this communism already ??????
One reason why UBI cannot work is that money isn’t ‘value’; it is a representation of productive activity. Simply creating money and giving it to people without any increase in valuable, productive activity, will only be inflationary, and hugely diminish the value of currency. This is a pretty elementary economic principle, yet I never hear it discussed when UBI is the subject.
Not entirely. Essentially giving people money can enable them to be productive. For example, it allows you to set up a company. Also it generates demand, inflation can occur when an economy runs out of things to buy because the 'velocity' of money goes down. So in the end, in a FIAT system the government has to create money or growth will stagnate. To question is only, how much is too much.
@@LegDayLas 100%. The covid era was a textbook example of how to predicate massive inflation. Create an oversupply of money in the system without the same relative rise in productive activity. So you end up with more money competing for the same amount of goods and services. In essence this is just the supply / demand principle being proven.
@@dojadog4223growth will not stagnate if money isn't printed, it has to stay circulating. Taking money out of circulation causes every existing unit of it to go up in value. Introducing more of it into a system reduces it's value. Basic zero sum ludology. You have to think zero sum to understand money, but think infinite money to make money.
I have no problem providing for my fellow man. I resent greatly being forced to support deadbeats, junkies and others that work the system. Often through multiple generations.
It makes sense that cultures have come to valorize work to some extent. But you know what doesn't make sense? Failing to take advantage of labor-saving technology, and using central banks & governments to create pointless jobs instead. UBI is a sane alternative to the monetary status quo, where central banks boost employment as an inferior and inefficient means of supporting aggregate consumer spending.
@@UBIeconomics I have seen a form of UBI on Canadian native reservations. The effect is extremely negative. Massive substance abuse and societal ills. The concept that everyone is going to be a satisfied artist is naive. Struggle Achievement and Responsibility are necessary for a functioning society.
Canada did one of the first (only??) UBI experiments in the 1970's in a town called Gimli, Manitoba. The experiment - called Mincome - evidently had excellent results. People went back to school, violence dropped and the economy grew. People cite the Mincome study as evidence that a UBI will work. Here's the problem: Canada was a high-trust society in the 1970s with a high degree of social cohesion, Gimli had a homogenous population and there was a widely shared set of values in Canada at the time. None of this applies any longer. Canada is hugely diverse and we are bringing in almost a million people a year now from places in the world where they do not have western values. None of this would work any more.
What we'll have will also be exactly like "The Company Store". You'll only be able to spend money on approved purchases, and you won't be able to save or invest. AT ALL. No home, no nest egg, nothing.
This right wing meme of "high trust societies" never made any sense to me. Mostly because as you just demonstrated (just like everyone else who prattles on about "high trust" and "low trust"), you make no attempt to quantify whether a society IS actually high trust or low trust, whether a society SHOULD BE label high trust or low trust, rather you just equate diversity with low trust and homogeneity with high trust.
@@JamesR1986 If you don't understand that people behaving and believing similar to other people inspires a higher level of trust, then there is truly no hope for you.
My own concern about the UBI matches what I have seen about subsidies to higher education and medical services. Government money allows people to demand higher prices.
Don't sign up for it until you read the fine print that requires you to be euthanized when you reach 50, or if you have a serious illness. Governments complain now about the cost of providing pensions. You will have no value to the rest of your society. 50 years ago, NZ was full of practical people. Social welfare has created a nation of 'can't do's'. I live in a town that is surrounded by plantation forestry. The supermarkets sell small bags of firewood and kindling, and the customers probably need firelighters to get their wood fires to ignite. Plenty of customers for UBI here.
I believe they were known as the "nomenklatura." They lived in beautiful homes, drove nice cars, took luxurious vacations, while the average citizen was struggling to survive. I remember seeing video of Daniel Ortega driving around the Nicaraguan capital in a Mercedes, while most Nicaraguans couldn't even afford a car.
It's like a high school diploma. When few people graduated from high school, it was a vehicle to a decent job. When most people had a high school diploma, you needed college to get a good job. When everyone gets UBI, the amount of spending power that UBI provides will be worthless, and you will need much more to buy anything of value. Inflation will quickly turn UBI into the poverty level, and everything will get more expensive.
@KraszuPolis when they print money and hand it out, the amount they print has no value add attached to it. When no value is added to the economy but more money is available, it means more money is exchanged for the same goods and services. That is called inflation. Modern monetary theory is fantasy. The people pushing it are either stupid or intentionally wrecking the economy for nefarious purposes.
Makes no sense if you impoverish people you reduce demand. If consumption drops wouldnt that mean prices also? Or is the system rigged? The problem is in how many workers we need to make how many products and services we need. Automation doesnt happen overnight, its a transition.
@pax256 You would think that would be the case until you realize that those who own the automation will do what they can to keep others from participating. They pay them off with UBI to satisfy them so they don't try to get into the market. Meanwhile, the value of that UBI is dropping, and they can control the population by withholding it. If you expect to still get your payments and have all of your constitutional rights, you are mistaken. When automation is fully in place and the owners of it can exchange among themselves, the rest of the population will be useless eaters.
@@michaellowe3665 I agree thats the current system. We are still being proselytized about wage income when its being whittled away by progress. The point being the longer they can keep all the investment income for themselves the wealthy will end up with a bigger piece of the pie not just in terms of income but assets. UBI as it is masks the need of investment income being spread more fairly.
there's a book called whispers of manifestation on borlest , and it talks about how using some secret tehniques you can attract almost everything in life it's not some bullshit law of attraction, it's the real deal
"Pet" is an optimistic term. "Hen" or "Ox" might be more apt. Productive animals on a property are fed and cared for. Once they have outlived their use, only sentiment keeps them from being culled. "Useless eaters" is less a pejorative directed toward learned-helplessness, and more an indication of how communist dictators like Stalin and Mao view the peasants they eventually slaughter to reduce demand for resources. When collectivists start using that phrase (and they have), know that they have unspoken plans already.
@@nicolejennings8389 Except that people pay into social security. Its supposed to be a forced retirement investment. UBI is not paid into but is a "gift" from the state. As Reagan said, if the gov't comes to your door offering to help, don't answer.
In the UK, there are families far better off on state benefits, than working families. People are walking up to this. UK is going to have an economy crash soon.
They're so dependant on the dole there. The sheer volume of people who now refuse to get off it is depressing. It increased monumentally over covid and a lot of them are claiming mental health issues which is hard to disprove.
@@lr6477 what happened is that people realised they would be better off working 16 hours a week and claiming universal credits (benefits) for the rest of the week. Why slog your guts out for 40 hours a week but earn the same amount? This situation is crazy.
Benefits in the UK are not as generous as you guys think, you nearly always get more working. The problem is the oversupply of labour and undersupply of jobs caused by 3 things... automation, moving production to china and mass immigration. This has made employees very replaceable leading to the work place being more demanding than ever before. The more replaceable you are, the more companies will try to squeeze out of you. A lot of companies now use agency staff so they can get rid of people at a moments notice. They also have crazy almost unreachable targets that most people struggle to meet and they digitally monitor you. All so that they can extract as much out of you as possible. And the result is people burn out and quit. Their is no secure employment with zero hours contracts plus terrible working conditions. I think this is where the disconnect is with the older generation and younger people. I don't think older people realise how much harder a standard job is today compared to back in their day.
Honestly that's mostly because they've financialized and exported all industry. And then they gave endless benefits to the rich and big capital. They are essentially the biggest receivers of welfare and this is what is stagnating the economy. You can't actually run a country with speculation and rent seeking. It's a paper reality.
We did this in Australia during the pandemic... It made me question why I was going back to work for 40 hrs a week when I was getting 30% less doing nothing at all. I was massively lazy and took a good month before I shook that laziness.
Under the pandemic furlow in the UK this enabled me to learn c# programming to a high level, build a device for superluminal communication, learn CAD/CAM and do some great paintings.
Maybe that is the point. Maybe the reality is you don't need to work that much. Maybe spend that extra time living your life instead of thinking about doing the thing that is also supposed to enable you to live your life. The 40 hour work week is a man made thing to help companies achieve a certain level of productivity. It is not the entire purpose of our existence. Food for thought
@@holdensukut1989 Too right and you have to ask isn't that the purpose of AI and automation because from where I am looking at it right now these two are only being used to make higher profits. If the workers that lose there jobs or are needed to work less to AI and automation do not gain or actually lose out from it what is the point in, and you can only conclude that its all again to make the rich richer.
But that’s not how UBI works. Everyone would get it, also when you’re working. Of course you feel like slacking if you barely earn more with a 40 hour work week. But with real UBI, let’s say you earn 100% and UBI is 70%, like in your example, then your income would be 170%. Suddenly sounds way better than 70%, not? UBI done right would really improve quality of life for the middle class.
Yep we have a lot of newcomers that have never paid in to the system soaking up all the resources. And I know I’m paying more tax because of it and getting worse service.
You shouldnt get special right just because you were born first. Older generations are the ones who messed it up they dont get to decide the fix. They care more about a strong military whatever that is.
@solairethedarksoul who are the newcomers you refer to? Undocumented workers are paying taxes, FICA, and Medicare tax but can't collect on it. Can't collect SSDI if they become disabled. They need to take the cap off FICA.
@@lyndachele oh sweet pay tax once, twice three times, maybe on a 711 pay cheque, Full benefits. I pay my whole life and have to wait 6-8 hours in an emergency room to just get looked at.
They can do it becuase of the excess oil money and small population. Its basically to keep the drones happy so they dont cause trouble. Down the road when that oil money runs out they will be in for a revolt.
@@darbyheavey406 I grew up in rural Arkansas over fifty years ago. Poverty was rampant. People farmed usually with mules, hunted and fished. Most qualified for government commodities. There weren't a lot of economic opportunities. A lower standard of living wasn't shameful it was just reality. We ultimately started a dairy. It was marginally profitable though we worked hard. We unfortunately started just before big dairy launched. Even hard work isn't an assurance of financial success. You need the right idea at the right time and a lot of luck.
Being productive is a major contributor to HAPPINESS. People who WANT UBI for themselves, are asking to be useless, and less happy, and are less likely to wind up with a sense of self esteem. They don't realize this, but UBI will hurt them. The necessity to be productive in order to make money for food, clothing and shelter, is a major incentive that often leads to happiness.
What about all the backstabbing ,jealousy mean behaviour of humans in the workplace, the loss of health by stress and harsh work conditions, not to mention working like a dog without getting paid .that isn't making me happy .I would more happy with ubi and spending my time on my hobbies than working to make someone else rich.
@@366317 Do something entrepreneurial with your hobbies, my friend. Find a way to make something that people will want to buy. Start a cool, passionate little business and then you will be working for yourself. That's the free market. YOU own the means of production, not the government, and not the factory owner. Bring your passion to the world. And you will make the world a better place. That is what freedom allows. UBI removes the incentive for you to help the world with your own special passion and talent.
Not only is it a bad idea, it has been tried in Canada twice and in Finland as well. In Canada, the program became too costly, no data was collected to see progress, and politicians used it as a gimmick to get elected. In Finland, there was no advantage or movement out of poverty for those individuals who collected. It just became free money. When the government starts giving you "free" money, you will see in increases in drug addictions and death. Politicians will use it as a means to get elected by promising to raise it every election year. It's a bad idea and that's why leftists and socialists love it.
I am not sure what tests you are talking about but i did google them and both tests concluded small but positive results but also discovered complex challenges such a system would face since it would need huge overhauls in both state finance and the work market.
@@kenji214245 It's inflationary and it will only increase inequalities. If you reward slackers and punish hard workers; it naturally creates an incentive to produce less and reward squalor.
@@vladimirofsvalbard9477 Yes and no there is a compromise to be made and we already have that as it is. Minimalists not wanting to work living on small jobs already exists and the UBI models so far are only meant to cover basic needs so if you want any luxury stuff or splurge you have to work to earn the extra. Alongside that UBI would remove majority of all government based benefit systems which would save govs billions on social spending programs.
The government gives free money to corporations and wealthy individuals all the time. Commit financial malfeasance on a huge scale, what do you get? You get a million dollar bonus. Until everyone is treated the same we will never have a meritocracy. What we have is a very corrupt oligarchy run by monopolistic corporations.
@@kenji214245 This is why it's essential that the government stop protecting corporations. If you take away the 'goodie bags' for big business; magically small competitors can tear them apart and produce lower prices and better quality. It would also raise GDP and stimulate creativity. The longer you let these business giants get bailed out and soak up the currency; it creates the situation that we're in (low GDP with high debt in an eventual hyperinflation economy).
A very insightful comment from Dr Weinstein in regards to the fundamental flaw in communism: it rewards those who contribute least and punishes those who contribute most. That line alone made this video worth the time invested.
That's strictly speaking from a financial standpoint. It ignores the entirety of the rest of humanity and the status that can be derived from achieving things. Consider that children grow up on UBI provided by their parents. It's not the different.
When you ask a capitalist, you get a capitalist answer, when yku ask a former communist you get CIA dibble, when you ask a polititian you get sales. The undergrkumd railrkad risked life and limb tk free slaves. We are all slaves right now. Douglas gave yku an answer from half a century ago. Verbatum. BTW There are studies that show when people don't need to worl, they eventually gravitate toward joyful work and have higher production. Will you please find some of that and bring it on ylur show? Hint: There is an artist with a center in upstate NY, that offers creativity retreats. The retreat begins with 8 hours of boredom.❤
@@someguyusa Communist tends to have a certain superficial appeal to those who demand things like equity and fairness. Equity in itself is a complete myth on so many levels but it makes for a good sound bite in the mouths of politicians. We have the evidence now; the communist experiment has been repeated many times over the last century and it's been disastrous on every occasion. We know what happens now, we have the data, there is no excuse for going down that route once more.
The economy will be much larger as A.I. progresses and creates more efficient ways of doing things. And not all the money printed during that time period were stimulus checks to working people.... your comment is very shortsighted. No clue why people gave it so many thumbs up.
It gave more to support shareholders of large corporations thru much larger giveaways. Also people for the first time in their lives got to wake up at home without going to work for weeks on end. It was like they had their lives to live much like the wealthy who have never worked or the poverty stricken who can't work or never have.
That oligarchs use ubi to try to instigate digital identity doesn't change the fact that every successful company from musk to the small business man benefits from a ubi type payment paid by taxpayers, except not available to everyone, creating an apartheid. A ubi could easily be implemented with a vat tax displacing welfare.
@@ProfoundFamiliarity taxes. They're not supposed to all go to rich corporations and bombing brown kids. They're supposed to be an exchange for all citizens to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. And a ubi is not charity or welfare. It's literally just a blanket pay out equally to all. Basically, for anyone who wants wealth distribution because our govt has been draining our tax base for forever wars ... You can either trust the govt to create a complicated system of welfare, or do a ubi distribution. Now granted, if not passed as an amendment and tied to gdp and a few other caveats, like any other tool of wealth distribution, it will be coopted for control.
With UBI there needs to also be massive therapy. There is a reason why people get super lazy and demotivated at the start of UBI - they’re traumatized from the system, they just got unplugged from it.
@@beccymalloy If the economy really collapses, the goodwill we've built up w/ neighbors will be our currency. I always try to produce more than I need so I can give some away. Cast your bread upon the waters, and it will come back to you.
Can you travel anywhere in the world first class? Eat the best foods on the planet? Buy the best vehicle to drive around in that is available at the moment? Live in an apartment in a penthouse in any city of the world?
And as long as you can find other people to do all the work you need done, like health care, growing food, providing energy and roads and infrastructure. Less good if no one is working.
Value is based on scarcity and utility. Giving anything away devalues it. UBI just means the "bottom" will get reset upwards. Give anyone who asks $25,0000 to buy a home and watch the price of homes increase by much more than $25,000.
I have seen this first hand in my family. If you give some people basic life support… that is what they will adjust to live with and survive. They will not try to get more. They will be forever dependent and never try to get more. Those that try to get more, will resent those that don’t try to get more.
And yet most UBI tests done which is about 160 of them globally saw that majority of people would be more likely to get a job to increase the cash flow to afford a more luxurious lifestyle and take more chances like starting their own companies or move to places where there was more work options. So it does sound more like a family problem on your end.
@@kenji214245 nope… I witnessed it my entire life. When someone knows a freebie is coming, they also don’t respect it. The kids given cars, wrecked them speeding or crashing when drunk… they didn’t care about destroying what was given to them, only if they would get caught. Rarely is it go to give anyone something for free, if they know they will keep getting that something for free.
It’s becoming just like the book “atlas shrugged” by Ayn Rand. Accurately describes what would happen with an equity type system. When everyone is an eater and everyone gets the same irregardless of effort the creators become disenfranchised. Innovation and creation stops, the smart and useful of society drop out rather than be taken advantage of and everything falls into disrepair. Eventually all the producers, creators and the knowledgeable ones of society break away and form their own underground system while the rest keep going toward their own destruction. That book should be required reading in every school.
@@AsianSupport The characters don't abide by their own rules. The objectivist-god-author makes sure everything works out perfectly even when the heroes do stupid shit. The heroes don't follow their own rules when they're interacting with the bad guys. For example, Dagny leaves to die all the railroad workers who protected the rails she was riding on. The copper baron guy defrauds investors, intentionally misleading them about the value of his purchases. The pirate guy is a pirate - he sinks ships and leaves sailors to die in the middle of the north atlantic and shells buildings on the land with no knowledge of who might be inside, miraculously neither of which causes any harm to innocent people. Dagny also murders in cold blood a guard who tries to actually make an intelligent decisions because she knows if he gathers the information he needs she'll be arrested; she then steps over his lifeless body as if it's a dog in the street. Every single hero was an awful and dishonorable and unlikeable person if you read it from the POV of anyone other than the author. Oh, and she has no idea how the legal system works, and the only way the "heroes" get away is via magic.
BTW Ayn Rand thought all the Workers were "Parasites" to, only the Industrialists were worthy People, lets not look to someone like her who hated 99% of humanity for advice!
But if everyone produces more than they consumed, we'd all be "poor" but materially unbelievably rich. Ultimately money/wealth has limited utility. You wear one pair of trousers and eat one lunch, and all that wealth would just be used to develop things that would incrementally better human life.
1.Callous disdain 2.Learned helplessness. How about loss of identity for #3? Say I'm a plumber, part of a skilled community. Not the only skill, but vital. That's who I am (or was...)
I already give half of my paycheck to the government so there is no way that I'll gladly accept useless people to benefit from it even more. Helping out others has its limits and we're already over the tolerable.
U already do. Ubi works when robots doing all the work. Ubi is everyone gets it and alone pays for rent food medicinal costs. I dont agree with him here.
@@JimmyJimmyRiddle its welfare for the broke, tax return for everyone else. I did. The machines doing all the labor. Chatgpt and Boston dynamics parlour robot are both like a toddler atm. 10 years they won't need immigrant Labor. Better a UBI then democrats starting a global war to cull the masses. They are already playing divide and conquer to set things up.
It ain't the poor people that are the problem. It's the multi millionaires, billionaires, and big corporations cheating on their taxes that are the real problem. Ask yourself, if you're paying half your paycheck in taxes why aren't the wealthy and huge corporations paying a higher percentage in taxes than you? Doesn't sound fair to me. But morons like the weinsteins would direct your ire to some poor people getting a few bucks while the wealthy are literally stealing TRILLIONS out the back door.
Only half? IN what paradise do you live? I'm being robbed of ca 97 % of the fruit of my labour through income tax, consumption tax, tax on savings and, one of the biggest factors, inflation through currency devaluation.
Money can be easily printed and distributed. But if there is not an increase in production, there will be nothing to buy, prices will go up and everyone's money will be worthless
If current modern industry decided to go all out in production rates we could outproduce majority of hardware goods demands within 1 year to a fraction of the costs the consumers would collectively pay to get it.
The thing that people in general don't understand is that someone always pays. Either pay upfront or you pay when the consequences happen. The original problem is people wanting cheap products and not realizing that cheap products come with problems. On the topic of UBI it would be nice if you automatically got a check if you worked a full week and your paycheck put you below the poverty level
The cost of marriage is pretty high for men. The women take your life, expect you to make them rich, and in return all you get is fed and . . . . . . other stuff.
We just had a test case for UBI in the US. It came with the pandemic. Multiple rounds of checks were sent to people, essentially UBI checks. What happened? Money flooded into the economy. Business owners massively raised prices, because they could. A huge wealth transfer went from the struggling to the rich. Businesses had massive profits. The wealth gap grew. The national debt increased tremendously. And regular people are more in debt now than they were before. We don't have to have a theoretical "thought experiment" on what would happen with UBI. It was just tested in the US a couple of years ago. We can see what happened.
Easy solution to fix this is a wealth tax on assets owned over a certain amount so it doesn't affect working people. All the money raised from price increases will be re-collected from the wealth tax.
And one other comment. That is NOT why the wealth gap grew. The wealth gap grew because a lot of that printed money went into the pockets of wealthy people to maintain jobs. Instead, it was used to buy up all sorts of assets such as stocks, housing, crypto, etc.... That is what caused the wealth gap to widened. Please get your facts straight. And yes, UBI will be necessary when there are no more jobs for average people to earn a living.
@@henrythegreatamerican8136 My facts are straight. I didn't say it was the ONLY reason why the wealth gap increased. UBI will not work because of basic economic money flow principles. The money would temporarily be in the hands of poor people and they would spend the money. Spending money puts it in the hands of the owners. Owners don't have to spend the money. They can save it, invest it, pay themselves the money, do stock buybacks etc. all of the things that you said. And because there is more "printed money" in the economy than there would be without UBI, owners can raise the prices and the poor people will shortly be no better off than they were before they got UBI.
@@BlackJesus8463 When it comes at the expense of others, yes, it does. Why should we have to work harder so you don't? We have to provide value, but you don't? Grow up.
That’s impossible. They can’t consume unless they are causing theft or someone is giving them something (freely) so useless eaters is an oxymoron and what the interviewee is correctly identifying as wrong.
What he said at the end is true because I saw people posting comments about how unfair it is for the middle class to have a good life. Unfair? They work hard for it. Of course, some cheated to get what they wanted. That's why we need to maintain a safety net for the non-achievers. Example, when you harvest, do not collect all. Leave some for the widow and orphans.
Isn’t this already happening with disability (sometimes fraudulent), welfare, etc? I’ve watched neighbors on disability “chill out” all day, while I go to work- paying taxes that help to fund their “disability” (this comment is only meant for fraudulent disability where an able-bodied, functional adult is collecting funds).
Yes. Add in the lawyers who help people get those checks. Who pays them? A big scam to get people reliant on Big Daddy, which is designed simply to make the Powers more money.
Yeah, chilling out on the highest state run disability benefit of 1600 a month sounds awesome, especially when you have some sort of disability that requires more effort than the average person to qualify for said benefits.
Then voting for higher taxes and socialist policies. Im not against helping the actual needy but its a giant grift and now we have 20-30 million illegals that get priority over vets and other americans
Not all disabilities are physical. I have paranoid schizophrenia which qualifies me for disability. I've tried working and my symptoms make it hard to function something even on medication
My dad was actually encouraged by his doctor to go on disability even though he was capable of working. Definitely made for an "awesome" childhood when your dad sits at home all day making $900 a month and sometimes lacking the basics. The medical system in this country needs a massive overhaul as well.
Communist sentiment didn't arise from a failed meritocracy, humans have desired collectivist values for thousands of years. Most people want you to do well but not better than them, it doesn't matter if you live in a democracy or a communist dictatorship, humans have always been the same. The tall poppy always gets cut down. The straw that usually breaks the camels back that ushers in socialist/communist policies are the very same things the people voted for in the first place, equal opportunities. Everyone is fine when the opportunities are equal but when the outcomes are vastly different and when it becomes clear as day to the people, they will begin to resent the "winners" despite everyone's lives being objectively better than it was 50 years ago.
Let us not have winners, all paid the same, or as buddhist company in UK paid by your need, the owner got less pay than some of his workers because they had children so needed more. He was single. Simples
Price's Law bud. The margins have to be balanced at about 80/20 from an income standpoint. 50/50 results in devastation and 99/1 results in devastation. This is WHY you have to have destabilizing recessions. It reshuffles the deck between have's and have nots. If you create a Keynesian (drown recessions with inflation) system like we have now. Then the inequalities run out of control and people blame the free market.
"people for whom that doesn't work" @5:50 'That doesn't work' means everyone who is not #1. In the quest for power, there can be only one. Abel and Cain. Old story
Brilliant, succinct summation of the problem with meritocracy (5:35) vs. the problem with communism (6:35). Each represents "going to an extreme to avoid an extreme". I wish the discussion would've then turned to what the latest and most promising proposals are, to better synthesize the positive points of each, while eliminating the negative - the "mixed economy" (which most countries at some point at least attempt). Maybe the full episode does discuss that - I'll have to check it out. But as it stands, I see too many people just cheerleading for one side or the other, without making any genuine effort to try to bridge the divide, or to even acknowledge that the opposing view has some merit in some/any aspect.
Although Prof. Weinstein isn't wrong in his thoughts about the impossibility of communism, he is incomplete here: the most fundamental reason why communism is impossible is the lack of a price system, prices aggregate all information in an economy, they are a market product at the end of a long line of human activity
Communism fails for the same reason Capitalism does they just do it at different speeds and with different perspectives and that reason is called human greed and ignorance.
Exactly right on. These conversations should be happening on a daily bases. The younger generation need a face slap of reality. Even the old puppet masters need to come to reality of the truth.
Did you have all of your needs provided to you by your parents when you were growing up? Did you still become a productive member of society? Well, that's pretty much the same thing as UBI, imo.
The younger generation needs what? The younger generation has figured out that the economy is broken and they ain't playing. Bret is a great example of this. Remember academic freedom? Back when people who were smart were allowed to conduct actual research in universities. That isn't allowed now, you need to publish tons of BS papers so smart people know they can't progress in academia. If you are a brilliant person who can come up with some new product or idea, you know you're gonna have to sell your rights to some vast corporation or barely survive... And this same pattern repeats elsewhere. It's just not worth it to do anything good.
Solutions are in Beijing, BRI Forum cooperation in Agricultural-STEM Healthcare-Infrastructure Domestic manufacturing-Poverty alleviation... CGTN The Point-Hub-Heat, Shanghai Eye, Reporterfy Media-Cyrus Janssen, RT International Africa Summit-SPIEF
My understanding is that UBI was extensively trialled (in the 50s-60s I think) and was a roaring success on all levels. Granted the 50's was a very different time to today, but people were generally freed up to do things that they loved the they couldn't afford to do before because they had to get buy (play music, get creative, volunteer, take on low-paid work that they enjoyed) And it's very different to the current social services systems because with UBI you don't need to employ thousands of pen pushers to administer those out of work (huge saving right there). Don't forget there are millions of lazy, bored, disinterested people IN work today!
@BlackJesus8463 just curious if you know the experiment he is talking about? Because this comment was not about calling people "rats" and dehumanising people, if you understand his reference point.
Exactly, but you could own a robot that can work for you in Capitalist society or a small factory of robots. In Communism the state/party would own the company making the robot and the ai as well as the robots and ai. You would then have to pray to whatever god you know that they don't revoke your party membership/citizenship.
They've been saying this for 40+ years. All they need to do, is drop the standard work week from 40 hrs, to 30, then 20, then 10. We'll end up like in Star Trek where people contribute, but have lots of time to do what they want.
I agree. When people agree on what qualifies as paid labor (which is harder than you might think), there turns out to be no correlation between how many hours a person works a week and how much money they make (and certainly not between how much wealth their assets generate).
If you have ever been on food stamps and government assistance you will know that it is very difficult to get off of. My experience was that I was the only income provider for my wife and three children. I was climbing the ranks in my profession and eventually came to the point where my income would disqualify my family from government assistance. When I got the raise that pushed me over the limit it was like taking a $15,000 annual pay cut. My wife and I knew it was coming and had planned our budget accordingly, but it still hurt and made life incredibly hard. Unfortunately, the way that the human mind works, welfare often incentivizes people to not cross the income threshold and to stay perpetually poor.
The landlords will just raise the rents to absorb that UBi just like they did with the COVID checks. The shops will raise their prices to capture that UBI just like they did with the COVID checks.
@@mrpyther5944 Not necessarily. A case is happening in Atlanta where nearly all rental companies were using the same exact third-party algorithm to determine prices. Which is essentially just price fixing at that point and needs government intervention. To make it worse the algorithm sets the price at such a high point that these places can maintain 70% occupancy and make more money. We also aren't talking about using the approach to selling cars. Providing shelter, a basic human right, should be held to a higher standard.
@@davida730you do you realize that over half the rental properties are not owned by "rental companies"? Those of us who are private landlords own over half of the supply, and I can assure you we are not fixing prices using any types of algorithms. Also, UBI has only ever been tried in small populations. That's why people think it works, because there's no major disruption to the bottom of the market. Once you end up with an entire population receiving ubi, there's simply not enough supply to go around. The problem right now is we do not have enough housing in this country. Giving everybody piles of money doesn't solve that. It simply makes the existing inventory more expensive.
@@sidwhiting665 Rental properties and total units are very different things. Jim down the street who owns 2 rental houses isn't the same as whatever corporation owning a couple 200 unit apartment complexes.
The stupid thing about UBI during the pandemic is they gave it to EVERYONE, far beyond those who actually needed it, and the people who didn't need it invested it in the stock market, causing assets to go up and the class division to worsen.
It's Universal. As soon as you start putting rules and limits on it you naturally create bureaucracy to determine who doesn't need it. I want you to think about the negative version of ubi which are poor taxes, like speeding tickets, the lottery, any flat rate payment that is meaningful to the poor, but insignificant to the rich. I don't think that the rich were meaningfully impacted by a flat $1500 payment, I think that the inflation caused by printing the money was wayyy more meaningful to the rich. Or the control on the economy by lockdowns.
I was in healthcare. I was making more money than ever working overtime and hazard pay. Then the government sends me a four figure check for no reason. Crazy times indeed lol
Good luck to 70% who will never found a job and making 1300 a month off the govt. That is what is coming in the next 15 years. 15% of population will control 95% of the wealth
I do not support UBI. As an American I believe that there should not be a dollar amount given to you but rather an amount that the government cannot take from you. I talked to a guy who was paying child support. It was high enough that be could not afford a place to live so he lived in his truck. The issued a warrant for failing to pay and they arrested him and had is truck towed. Everything he had was in it and he could not afford to get it out of impound because they had already taken all his money when they processed him into jail. He ended up in,prison for being poor. I think this is a horrible situation and that the government should not take anyones money unless they have a basic income to support themselves. An income threshold.
But what do you do when automation and AI become so highly efficient that there will be less relevant jobs than there will be people able to do them. Should we just toss them to the streets? Create fake jobs just to justify it or simply give them enough food and some kind of 3D printed budget box home to live in like some dystopian sci-fi??
True but who pays for the child, the government if he does not. But you should be left with ability to make a living, as you say perhaps a %, but that still means the government pick up the rest.
Instead of giving money we should give basic needs. Nutritional food yes, money no. Basic housing yes, money no. Education yes, money no. Healthcare yes, money no. Everything else than basic needs is worked for. There's a way to make it work. Everyone starts from the same spot, yes. Everyone ends up at same spot, no. Work determines that. No excuses.
Electricity should be freely available for all to use. We should all be allowed to live on our own family land for FREE no mortgage no council property taxes "rates" no rent. Water should be FREE no cost - it comes from the Earth the rivers the seas
You no the potential of AI to basically provide everyone with individualized education and health/ medical care. Then there are already AI devices that for a few hundred dollars that cook food almost as good as professionals. It’s also 5 -10 years until cultured meat is widely available and less expensive than meat today
Electricity is free ... once you buy your solar panels. If you need someone else to make it and send it to you, not so much. Water can be free if you live on a lake or river or can dig a well. Piped water treated and monitored for safety, again, not so much.
@@alanj9978 if you live somewhere with high humidity you can condense drinking water from the air. Even in a dessert with little rain with a normal size roof.you can catch enough rain water to get through a year.
It‘s necessary to introduce the Unconditional Basic Income and we have to go even a step further. We have to share more and give things away or allow to use them 4 free on the other hand we have to learn to consume and produce less. Wealth is more important than rich.
Whoa! I’d never heard the term “useless eaters” before. I looked up the quote on the topic and it makes me both mad and sad. Unfortunately, this is reflected in the reality of how we care for other people. 2020 shined the light there and people have mostly looked away. God help us.
He seems to not understand. Everything he said revolves around the idea that the world will be like it always has been. “People” needing to provide value. But we are loving past that. We are moving into an era where we have an army of AI slave robots to do EVERYTHING that we don’t specifically want done by a human. Fly fishing guide? We want a human to do that. Elementary school teacher? A one-on-one robot teacher issued to each student likely would be able to do a far FAR better job of ensuring that person is educated. Someone helping install gutters on a building? Robot work. Someone making a fine art painting. Human work. Someone fixing the plumbing in my house, stocking shelves, or fixing my car? Robot work. Someone playing live music? Human work. We are going to essentially create a system where you can go onto an Amazon-type site and order anything you want. The only reason we’ll need money is to “throttle human desire to reasonable levels”. That is…we don’t need some teenage (or any age) moron going to the site and ordering 5 jet skis for him and his friends today…only to decide he doesn’t like jet skiing before they are delivered so they end up stacked in his back yard. Money will be “anti-hoarding” pills. So yeah…everyone will be given money at like… $60,000 a year ($5,000 a month) in today’s dollars. And parents will be given that on behalf of their child until the kid is 18 to incentivize having kids. It won’t be “unlimited” money. But for a married couple? It would be fine. And don’t bring up inflation. The AI Revolution would be DEflatinary and pushing prices down. The amount paid to each citizen would be calculated by how much the prices fell in the previous quarter and the. Determine how much would need to be printed to push the price back up to level. Then distribute that printed money evenly to each citizen. Learned helplessness? Nobody worries about that with the children of rich people. I think we’ll be fine. This idea that people have to be miserable and struggle to be happy is broken thinking. And if you are a Christian and reading this and you believe that…that suffering is necessary for happiness…then what happens in the eternal state? When there is no suffering? I think people will be plenty happy. Which means suffering is NOT necessary for happiness. So if you claim to be a Christian…purge that crap idea from your thinking from now to forever.
Thanks for the perfect update. I really appreciate the dedication in each video you post.The first step to successful investing is determining your goals and risk tolerance, Most people you see as wealth at a glance, a great career, purpose is the result of hard work and remains over time. There are no shortcuts to getting rich but there are smart ways to go about it. Now I can say that thanks to Ms. Clara Burn I am improving my understanding of this whole world and making new big profits every week.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, you don't need to have a hefty fund or ultra deep pockets like mutual fund to start investing. I initially invested $8k I was making return of the investment plus interests.
The free housing, education, and medical care that we (in the Western countries) lavish on asylum seekers is a form of UBI. They enter the USA, UK, France, etc illegally, and are then entitled to free housing, education, medicine, etc. They get to live at the expense of the people, which is pure compassion and selflessness. It would not be possible without government.
California's legislature is trying to pass a bill to pay illegal aliens $25K to help them buy a house. The consensus is that this bill will make it to Governor Newsom's desk where he will sign it. I love living in California except for the politics which I have to just ignore or I'll go goofy.
True in a way, but we also do let them havr jobs. And would you try to leave the UK if it was as bad as their country, war torn, taliban, no food, lack o water, no health care or would you stay in the UK, Not only that we disrupted the countries in the first place or helped to destabilise them.
As a blue collar worker of meritocracy, i can say the benefit of my competent labor was not compensated at the same proportional level as my bosses, in fact generally speaking 35 to 40 percent less. Now, taking into account the 3 to 4 years of lean times we predictably incur, them keeping us on is an equitable trade. Not everything that seems evil is, the most evil people in the world are the ones who want compensation from the people they claim to represent, ie unions and provide nothing anymore.
@@TurdFergusen oh yeah free to sleep on a park bench and eat sh*t off a shingle like a feral animal but not free to live off the land, make shelter etc
UNIVERSAL Basic Income is a big problem. However UNCONDITIONAL Basic Income may save human society. Universal means everyone gets the slave yoke. Unconditional means you cannot be targeted. All the money that that a country 'earns' should be distributed as a DIVIDEND to CITIZENS then RESIDENTS have to be taxed to pay for government expenditure. UBI does NOT passivate, it makes ALL work benefit the individual because it is accrued on TOP of the UBI that cannot be witheld.. Means tested benefits PASSIVATE because work diminished your benefits leaving you in a BENEFIT TRAP-
Countries don't earn money, individuals and businesses do. You're planning to confiscate all privately earned wealth and redistribute it? GL with that. Nobody will produce anything.
There are many ways to contribute to society that do not generate income necessarily. Art. Kindness. Helping others. Meditation. Parenting. How sad that many believe that our only sense of value and contribution is about money
Meritocracy actually does take care of, even reward those who fail initially. Operative term INITIALLY. Meritocracy gives strong credit to those who show perseverance. Those who show honest effort. Those who keep trying. Look to those crying the loudest about meritocracy not caring FOR THEM. And you'll find a recurring theme. Either they harp on the BUT WHAT IF I FAIL and so never try at all. Or they only ever try ONCE, and that usually only half heartedly at most. And when that doesn't result in a smashing success they give up entirely. I don't recall who said it, or who got credit for saying it, but it's true. The Success has failed more times than the Failure has tried.
The true solution is, Universal Basic Education and Universal Basic Job! "There is a wise old saying, "If you give a person a fish you can feed them for a day. When you teach a person to fish, they can feed themselves for a life time!"
Agree. But I will go further. I am all for free enterprise. What puzzles me however is WHY do just a FEW want so much......and MORE? We read daily that s0-and-so is worth for instance 100 Billion....or more. These are the types funny enough that ADVOCATES "just a little"....for EVERYBODY. I ask myself. How many lobsters can one eat per day? How many top class bottles of Champagne? How many yachts / Ferraris etc? Or does it become an OBSESSION....a way of life....to have MORE? How about putting a limit on what an individual can be worth? And whilst getting there still have the right to be an entrepreneur? Just a thought from me.
give a man a fish and you control the supply. Teach a man to fish and he will overfish his limit. Enough people will do this that the supply of fish will be decimated. Human nature at work.
@@martinbisschoff988 You asked why do a few want so much? The type of person who is extremely financially successful is the type of person who is also very competitive and driven. For example, Elon Musk had already become very wealthy several years ago, and could easily have just sat back and lived off of his many millions. But he was bored and restless. So he started Tesla, and SpaceX, and the Boring Company, etc. etc. Also, for some people (I don't know about Musk), at some point, it becomes about keeping score with other wealthy people. They literally try to get ahead of some other rich person or persons for the sake of competing, or sometimes simply for the personal challenge of finding out what they are capable of. You often hear of runners just going for their personal best times. Why do people climb Mount Everest? Because it's there and presents a challenge. Why do people play games? Because people love to compete. One more thought. Would you seriously want to limit someone like Musk from creating new companies, industries, jobs, and wealth for all of humanity? Have you (or anyone else) ever gotten a job from a poor person?
If you think the solution is UBI and UBJ, I would invite you to study the Soviet Union. It had both of those. The joke among the citizens was that they pretended to work, and the government pretended to pay them. If you want another example, you could read the firsthand account of early years of the Plymouth Colony in the US written by its first governor, William Bradford. They tried communism at first, and many starved to death. They switched to private ownership, and things improved dramatically. To paraphrase the late Margaret Thatcher, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Weinstein’s critique of Universal Basic Income (UBI) hinges on the notion that it could foster jealousy and antagonism among those who continue to generate wealth. While this perspective is a valid concern, it is somewhat narrow and overlooks the broader, more nuanced implications of UBI, especially in the context of rapidly evolving technologies and societal needs. Firstly, the premise that wealth generators will inevitably become envious of those receiving UBI assumes a zero-sum view of wealth and societal value. This perspective neglects the possibility of a future where economic roles and value generation are transformed. As automation and artificial intelligence increasingly perform tasks traditionally done by humans, the conventional dichotomy of wealth generators versus UBI recipients may become obsolete. The nature of work and wealth production could shift so dramatically that the very foundation of these societal categories might need re-evaluation. In such a context, UBI could be seen not as a source of division but as a NECESSARY adaptation to ensure social stability in a World where people would otherwise starve. Furthermore, Weinstein’s argument does not fully account for the societal changes brought about by technological advancements. The advent of AI and mechanization could lead to a future where traditional labour is significantly reduced or even rendered obsolete. In this scenario, the issue is not merely about balancing income but about addressing fundamental changes in the nature of work itself. UBI could be a pragmatic response to these changes, ensuring that all individuals have a safety net in an era where traditional forms of employment become increasingly scarce. Another critical consideration is the potential for societal harm if individuals are left without meaningful engagement. In my mind the real danger lies in a future where individuals, deprived of purposeful work, experience a loss of meaning and social isolation. If people are left without productive avenues to channel their energies and talents, this can indeed lead to societal malaise and instability. UBI, when coupled with robust support for community engagement, education, and personal development, could provide a framework for individuals to explore new forms of contribution and fulfilment. In essence, the challenge is not just to mitigate jealousy but to proactively shape a society where individuals are encouraged to pursue meaningful activities, regardless of traditional work structures. UBI can serve as a foundation for this new societal paradigm, ensuring that economic changes do not translate into social fragmentation. Rather than viewing UBI as a divisive element, it should be seen as part of a broader strategy to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world, promoting stability in the face of uncertainty.
I've been saying that for years. Hopefully, the oligarchs wake up, but this total lack of work ethic is insane and I can't Imagine how bad it could become
One of the major malfunctions with UBI is that there is no incentive for any business or individual to be greedy when the end result of being greedy is stolen from you and given to people who don’t even want to work. I do want to be clear. I am not against helping people out who need help. I think that a good society is one where if you biff your life, that there are people who will help you right the ship and get your life in order. I think things like Medicaid should be expanded on coverage and that it needs to be more comprehensive, that welfare and food stamps should be tapered off instead of cut out because people aren’t going to leave it knowing they will be worse off without it than with it. Hat being said, we need to make sure people are making better decisions with schooling and both the government and banks need to go, you know what, we aren’t going to do loans for crap degrees and the DoE needs to go, you know what, we are going to treat degrees as certifications and training instead of all this padded nonsense.
Greedy in what context? If a business is greedy; they get out-competed and go out of business. The entire concept of greed in business is a fallacy. Only with a government intervention is such greed actually possible.
It’s common sense. In order to cut Fed must increase money supply. That spikes inflation. Bond holders then require higher yield on long term bonds which will cause long term rates to go up, while the fed is dropping short term rates. The fed obviously knows economics and knows this. But, their purpose is to save a dying economy at the expense of higher long term rates, until the collapse happens - in other words the rate cuts are designed to “kick the can down the road” at the expense of a worse collapse. The final conclusion can only be that this is a controlled collapse, engineered as the great economic reset with the participants being the fed, well for me tho Bitcoin is the ultimate defence against a tyrannical government.r.....I've been engaged in active trading and managed to grow a nest egg of around 2.3Bitcoin to a decent 24Bitcoin....I'm especially grateful to Linda Wilburn, whose deep expertise and traditional trading acumen have been invaluable in this challenging, ever-evolving financial landscape.
In a field as rapidly evolving as cryptocurrency, staying updated is crucial. Linda’s continual research and adaptation to the latest market changes have been instrumental in helping me make informed decisions.
Totally commie thing to say. I hope you're referring to Blackrock not the mom and pop type who saved for a second home to invest. These people who rent can't afford a mortgage so be careful who you hate
Some see UBI as a social inheritance where people have participated in nation-building. Their work has brought us to modern times when robots will be doing the job. People have also been used as cannon fodder to settle disputes between nations. Now we have arrived at this point together, and it is time to receive our inheritance for the amazing job our ancestors have done in shaping this planet. In my opinion, a good reason we deserve UBI is the question we should be asking when companies start selling data. Well, let's see, it began in the 1980s, according to Google. The year is 2024, so I wonder how much has been sold and yet we don't get a paycheck. So, in a way, since the 1980s up until now, it's UBI money that we deserve.
Also, in the video where Dr Bret Weinstein is saying punishes those who contribute and rewards those that don't well let's see some workers especially CEOS don't do anything at jobs to contribute and they get paid but regardless there are going to be people who don't contribute even at jobs.
No idea! There will always be sellers that are rich or aspiring. Without a UBI there is noone to sell to. UBI will come from taxes of production. More production more tax. If land tax is involved it will work even better. See Phillip J Anderson, Fred Harrison, Catherine Cashmore.
Fantastic video! I have incurred so much losses trading on my own.... I trade well on demo but I think the real market is manipulated.... Can anyone help me out or at least tell me what I'm doing wrong??
Investing with an expert is the best strategy for beginners and busy investors, as most failures and losses in investment usually happen when you invest without proper guidance. I'm speaking from experience.
I will be eternally grateful to you, you have changed my entire life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear how you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small investment, thank you Adalyn Christopher.
Wow. I was a little surprised to see her mentioned here too. I had no idea she was so kind to so many people. It's amazing. I'm on my 5th transaction with her and she is the best.
She is a really good investment advisor. I had the opportunity to attend her seminars several times. That was the beginning of my cryptocurrency investments.
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for letting him speak, uninterrupted. I see so many interviewers talking over their guests lately and it’s really aggravating.
Those are interrogations, not interviews.
I have stop videos because I got tired of waiting to hear the guest.
It is aggravating when people don't immediately agree with what you say, and so you have to talk over them.
"Build a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life!"
Haha😂😮
,😂
I believe Terry Pratchett said that.
😂😂😂❤🎉
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I know someone on UBI , he isn’t exactly payed, he has his housing and food provided for him. He doesn’t drive nor own a car, lives within walking distance of everything he needs , and apart from the marginal income he scrapes together taking online surveys and selling items online has no margin. He has enough to eat but is still
Loosing weight because his food supply is unappealing. His health is not optimal dispute being able to and even necessarily walking to get the necessities of life. And he is deeply depressed.
His life is only marginally different from a prison inmate.
This is the modern welfare system under a different name.
Are you implying that he deserves more from the welfare system? Why is he entitled to a free life?
That is not UBI. That is welfare, it is meant to help struggling people along, not replace income. This one person being to lazy to do better his own situation does not mean we should discount a system which could be a safety net for millions of people in need. Many of those are hard working people who had a bad turn.
You guys have just proven weinstrins point 💯 %😂😂
Work gives people purpose and dignity. He is now just trapped in poverty more than ever.
@@holdensukut1989 The real beneficiaries of the Welfare system are the govt employees who do the means testing. In Finland it was the govt employees who against UBI because they knew that their job would be eliminated. UBI => give money directly to the people, Welfare => most of the money goes to the govt workers administering the Welfare.
‘All pigs are equal, but some pigs are more equal than others’
I think the quote was, "All Animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."
From George Orwell's Animal Farm
Canadian here.. I'm the horse, but I'm not going to drop dead. I'm about to retire early just to stop earning for these pillagers.
@@BC-yd6dl Canadian (BC'er) here too. Well on my way to the same goal. Socialism sucks.
@@BC-yd6dlThey know where the money is, you can’t hide it…
I used to believe in UBI. Then I experienced a mini version of it. I was being paid the same as slackers at work, because the boss 'felt bad' about giving raises and promotions to select few who actually deserved it. So when one brilliant worker got a raise everyone else got a raise. What happened was slackers started slacking more because they justified their behavior as legit, and actually started becoming aggressive to hard workers. Their entire agenda was to bring down hard workers because it was an eye sore to them. They disliked being reminded of their slacking. What's more, slackers create their own hierarchy because things get kushy. At the end of the day, no body gets work done and everyone becomes enemy to everyone. It's a huge huge financial and ethical damage on the company and everyone's career.
schools need more group projects to teach kids this same lesson
Thats not UBI, UBI is a floor not a ceiling. In this case, its a ceiling, you are not rewarded for being more productive. In the case of UBI, its a floor. A bum without a job will get at least $12,000 a year but that doesn't mean we all can make only that much. We are still free to make more.
Most people actually pay more than $12,000 in taxes, fees, and fines. So in these cases, its just a tax refund.
We also pay more for things that the government imposes like car insurance. Basically, the government forcing us to pay somebody else.
Education for some professions because you have to be licensed by the state therefore must go through required schooling else no job (essentially an imposition).
Healthcare, because doctors have to be licensed and hospitals have to be regulated, which increase private costs.
Housing. Zoning, parking requirements, set backs, building codes. All of these add costs to housing which is reflected in housing prices, rents, and mortgages.
Ya you have a point. I still support UBI because it's way cheaper than all the crime and expensive hospital stays of people on the street. California pays 7 billion on the homeless problem and it's worse than ever, but that cost taxpayers $40,000 a year per homeless person. that does not include the cost of crime etc..
so giving them $12000 is a huge savings.
That's not ubi at all
@@rifz42that's not how that works. UBI is what we saw in 2020,everyone got money. Then the inflation hit, exactly as predicted. Give everyone $1k a month and inflation will rise to strip that money off its buying power. Incidentally, minimum wage does the same thing. No matter how high minimum wage is, since it's the economic floor, the rest of the economy must inflate accordingly, which is why everyone on minimum wage is poor. UBI will just grossly exaccerbate inflation and if the government tries to compensate by increasing UBI distributions, the economy will go into a hyper inflation feed back loop.
I was traveling around China 15 years ago. They were harvesting rice in Yunan province. Cut by hand, tied in bundles to dry, then threshed either by hand or small machines that they moved by hand around the fields. I asked why they don't just buy a combined harvester to save all that labour. The answer was that if they sat around doing nothing, they'd just cause trouble, so give them something to do that is useful.
Idle hands are the devil's workshop.
That's just a dumb thing to say.
Yes. Keep it simple; do it the hard way.
@@ClarkPotter If you can't see the relevance to the contents of the interview, then you have a problem. The Chinese authorities are smarter than you, obviously.
😑
UBI would make people dependent on the government at a level we've never seen. And that income could be denied as way of shutting down the voices of anyone critical of the government or their preferred narrative. It would enslave huge percentages of the population.
That's why they keep pushing it. They just imported millions of potential beneficiaries who will either stir havok or stay shut for as long as the checks keeps coming in.
bullshit
I believe you are correct, but is there an alternative? Technology is increasing at a rate that is leaving millions so far behind they have zero skills to work in a new economy and/or they will not be needed anyway due to massive increases in automation. What are the consequences of ignoring them? I don't have the answers to serious problems on the horizon. Has anyone asked AI what to do?
we are already wage slaves..
But the system is already setup so that we are very dependent on the government already .
We are giving 40% of our revenue to taxes and you guys are worried about ubi calling it communism ? What do you call taking 40% away of someone’s income ?
Flash report ,America never had taxes before the 1900 . Can you guess where your tax money is going to ?
And you don’t call this communism already ??????
One reason why UBI cannot work is that money isn’t ‘value’; it is a representation of productive activity. Simply creating money and giving it to people without any increase in valuable, productive activity, will only be inflationary, and hugely diminish the value of currency. This is a pretty elementary economic principle, yet I never hear it discussed when UBI is the subject.
Not entirely. Essentially giving people money can enable them to be productive. For example, it allows you to set up a company. Also it generates demand, inflation can occur when an economy runs out of things to buy because the 'velocity' of money goes down. So in the end, in a FIAT system the government has to create money or growth will stagnate. To question is only, how much is too much.
The covid checks are a great example of why it would never work. The gov printed and sent out 3k to every person and it resulted in 9% inflation.
@@LegDayLas 100%. The covid era was a textbook example of how to predicate massive inflation. Create an oversupply of money in the system without the same relative rise in productive activity. So you end up with more money competing for the same amount of goods and services.
In essence this is just the supply / demand principle being proven.
@@LegDayLas I invested mine. Stocks were cheap and the checks were surplus. I've more than doubled my money.
@@dojadog4223growth will not stagnate if money isn't printed, it has to stay circulating. Taking money out of circulation causes every existing unit of it to go up in value. Introducing more of it into a system reduces it's value.
Basic zero sum ludology.
You have to think zero sum to understand money, but think infinite money to make money.
The answers they give in response to someone saying something like "try taking away income tax first" are really telling.
Bret is 100% correct. There is major trouble coming down the road. Prepare yourselves and you household now cause thing ARE going to get bad.
What can you even do? They'll just make anyone who doesn't need them a criminal
Prepare.... how?
There is light at the end of the tunnel. Just so long as it is not an oncoming express train all will be well.
Can you explaina how things are going to get bad?
Bret is a champion of free thinking common sense.
💜
Really? He has some ‘amazing’ takes on Covid / vaccines. Not at all rooted in conspiratorial, unsubstantiated thinking.
@@A.US.ter1 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
@@toby_fred he is. he's one of the boosted herd. just tell him to go get another booster.
@@A.US.ter1 get another booster. sheep.
Bret Weinstein is so refreshing to listen to. A VERY bright guy w/ logical, reasonable ideas not linked to a set ideology
Read a book.
I appreciate his nuanced and objective analysis of issues, for the most part.
Actually he does have a set ideology.
@mayamichelle6741 really? And what is his set ideology called?
Hahahahahahaha. You rube.
I have no problem providing for my fellow man. I resent greatly being forced to support deadbeats, junkies and others that work the system.
Often through multiple generations.
I hope you are not criticizing the baby boomer retirees.
@@DavidLockett-x4b Unlike yourself the Baby Boomers built a country that the rest of the world wants to live in. Including undoubtedly yourself.
It makes sense that cultures have come to valorize work to some extent. But you know what doesn't make sense? Failing to take advantage of labor-saving technology, and using central banks & governments to create pointless jobs instead. UBI is a sane alternative to the monetary status quo, where central banks boost employment as an inferior and inefficient means of supporting aggregate consumer spending.
@@UBIeconomics I have seen a form of UBI on Canadian native reservations. The effect is extremely negative. Massive substance abuse and societal ills. The concept that everyone is going to be a satisfied artist is naive.
Struggle Achievement and Responsibility are necessary for a functioning society.
The ones that worked for 40 years?@@DavidLockett-x4b
Canada did one of the first (only??) UBI experiments in the 1970's in a town called Gimli, Manitoba. The experiment - called Mincome - evidently had excellent results. People went back to school, violence dropped and the economy grew. People cite the Mincome study as evidence that a UBI will work. Here's the problem: Canada was a high-trust society in the 1970s with a high degree of social cohesion, Gimli had a homogenous population and there was a widely shared set of values in Canada at the time. None of this applies any longer. Canada is hugely diverse and we are bringing in almost a million people a year now from places in the world where they do not have western values. None of this would work any more.
but... diversity is their strength...
Its easy to make giving people someone elses money “work” for short periods of time.
What we'll have will also be exactly like "The Company Store". You'll only be able to spend money on approved purchases, and you won't be able to save or invest. AT ALL. No home, no nest egg, nothing.
This right wing meme of "high trust societies" never made any sense to me.
Mostly because as you just demonstrated (just like everyone else who prattles on about "high trust" and "low trust"), you make no attempt to quantify whether a society IS actually high trust or low trust, whether a society SHOULD BE label high trust or low trust, rather you just equate diversity with low trust and homogeneity with high trust.
@@JamesR1986 If you don't understand that people behaving and believing similar to other people inspires a higher level of trust, then there is truly no hope for you.
My own concern about the UBI matches what I have seen about subsidies to higher education and medical services. Government money allows people to demand higher prices.
Weinstein parents should've had more children. Bret and Eric are great thinkers. We need more people like them.
Shame about Harvey.
Hahahahaha
R selection vs K selection
@@fullmuntzing4246 Haha, true
UBI … if you are a compliant citizen and your social credit score is “good”
You mean we could have universal basic income before we have universal human rights?
They would rather make you disappear than pay you to consume their resources and expel CO2
That would make it selective basic income instead of universal, as in you're discriminating which group gets the cheese.
And probably not white, especially a white male.
Don't sign up for it until you read the fine print that requires you to be euthanized when you reach 50, or if you have a serious illness. Governments complain now about the cost of providing pensions. You will have no value to the rest of your society.
50 years ago, NZ was full of practical people. Social welfare has created a nation of 'can't do's'. I live in a town that is surrounded by plantation forestry. The supermarkets sell small bags of firewood and kindling, and the customers probably need firelighters to get their wood fires to ignite. Plenty of customers for UBI here.
The best definition of communism with just one element missing: communism creates its own aristocracy. Greetings from Bulgaria!
Trotsky lives
Absolutely - ultimately it’s one castle using the plebs to displace a rival castle.
I believe they were known as the "nomenklatura." They lived in beautiful homes, drove nice cars, took luxurious vacations, while the average citizen was struggling to survive. I remember seeing video of Daniel Ortega driving around the Nicaraguan capital in a Mercedes, while most Nicaraguans couldn't even afford a car.
@@bryanjones8778 Exactly! So "the system" basically doesn't change. The patricians change.
Would you say its fair to say Communism is the enslavement of the masses by a ruling class
It's like a high school diploma. When few people graduated from high school, it was a vehicle to a decent job. When most people had a high school diploma, you needed college to get a good job. When everyone gets UBI, the amount of spending power that UBI provides will be worthless, and you will need much more to buy anything of value. Inflation will quickly turn UBI into the poverty level, and everything will get more expensive.
How? If most ppl would be on UBI then companies would have to compete for those UBI levels of income.
@KraszuPolis when they print money and hand it out, the amount they print has no value add attached to it. When no value is added to the economy but more money is available, it means more money is exchanged for the same goods and services. That is called inflation. Modern monetary theory is fantasy. The people pushing it are either stupid or intentionally wrecking the economy for nefarious purposes.
Makes no sense if you impoverish people you reduce demand. If consumption drops wouldnt that mean prices also? Or is the system rigged? The problem is in how many workers we need to make how many products and services we need. Automation doesnt happen overnight, its a transition.
@pax256 You would think that would be the case until you realize that those who own the automation will do what they can to keep others from participating. They pay them off with UBI to satisfy them so they don't try to get into the market. Meanwhile, the value of that UBI is dropping, and they can control the population by withholding it. If you expect to still get your payments and have all of your constitutional rights, you are mistaken. When automation is fully in place and the owners of it can exchange among themselves, the rest of the population will be useless eaters.
@@michaellowe3665 I agree thats the current system. We are still being proselytized about wage income when its being whittled away by progress. The point being the longer they can keep all the investment income for themselves the wealthy will end up with a bigger piece of the pie not just in terms of income but assets. UBI as it is masks the need of investment income being spread more fairly.
there's a book called whispers of manifestation on borlest , and it talks about how using some secret tehniques you can attract almost everything in life it's not some bullshit law of attraction, it's the real deal
Wow that's a lot of bot upvotes for a totally irrelevant off-topic comment
Like The Secret by Rhonda Byrne? I tried it when I was 9, and it does not work.
Becoming a "pet" of the gov't is a very risky business. What will the gov't do with pets that are old, ill or troublesome?
What will your capitalist employer do with pets that are old, ill or troublesome? At least everyone can be valued at at least one vote.
@@teosandev6116 With SBI you have one employer...the gov't. With capitalism you can have your own business, change jobs.
"Pet" is an optimistic term. "Hen" or "Ox" might be more apt. Productive animals on a property are fed and cared for. Once they have outlived their use, only sentiment keeps them from being culled. "Useless eaters" is less a pejorative directed toward learned-helplessness, and more an indication of how communist dictators like Stalin and Mao view the peasants they eventually slaughter to reduce demand for resources. When collectivists start using that phrase (and they have), know that they have unspoken plans already.
This is the same concept as social security, since the elderly are currently on it
@@nicolejennings8389 Except that people pay into social security. Its supposed to be a forced retirement investment. UBI is not paid into but is a "gift" from the state. As Reagan said, if the gov't comes to your door offering to help, don't answer.
In the UK, there are families far better off on state benefits, than working families. People are walking up to this. UK is going to have an economy crash soon.
They're so dependant on the dole there. The sheer volume of people who now refuse to get off it is depressing. It increased monumentally over covid and a lot of them are claiming mental health issues which is hard to disprove.
@@lr6477 what happened is that people realised they would be better off working 16 hours a week and claiming universal credits (benefits) for the rest of the week. Why slog your guts out for 40 hours a week but earn the same amount? This situation is crazy.
Benefits in the UK are not as generous as you guys think, you nearly always get more working. The problem is the oversupply of labour and undersupply of jobs caused by 3 things... automation, moving production to china and mass immigration. This has made employees very replaceable leading to the work place being more demanding than ever before. The more replaceable you are, the more companies will try to squeeze out of you.
A lot of companies now use agency staff so they can get rid of people at a moments notice. They also have crazy almost unreachable targets that most people struggle to meet and they digitally monitor you. All so that they can extract as much out of you as possible. And the result is people burn out and quit. Their is no secure employment with zero hours contracts plus terrible working conditions.
I think this is where the disconnect is with the older generation and younger people. I don't think older people realise how much harder a standard job is today compared to back in their day.
5 kids big house lottery win every week
Honestly that's mostly because they've financialized and exported all industry. And then they gave endless benefits to the rich and big capital. They are essentially the biggest receivers of welfare and this is what is stagnating the economy. You can't actually run a country with speculation and rent seeking. It's a paper reality.
We did this in Australia during the pandemic... It made me question why I was going back to work for 40 hrs a week when I was getting 30% less doing nothing at all. I was massively lazy and took a good month before I shook that laziness.
Under the pandemic furlow in the UK this enabled me to learn c# programming to a high level, build a device for superluminal communication, learn CAD/CAM and do some great paintings.
Maybe that is the point. Maybe the reality is you don't need to work that much. Maybe spend that extra time living your life instead of thinking about doing the thing that is also supposed to enable you to live your life.
The 40 hour work week is a man made thing to help companies achieve a certain level of productivity. It is not the entire purpose of our existence.
Food for thought
@@holdensukut1989 Too right and you have to ask isn't that the purpose of AI and automation because from where I am looking at it right now these two are only being used to make higher profits. If the workers that lose there jobs or are needed to work less to AI and automation do not gain or actually lose out from it what is the point in, and you can only conclude that its all again to make the rich richer.
But that’s not how UBI works. Everyone would get it, also when you’re working. Of course you feel like slacking if you barely earn more with a 40 hour work week. But with real UBI, let’s say you earn 100% and UBI is 70%, like in your example, then your income would be 170%. Suddenly sounds way better than 70%, not?
UBI done right would really improve quality of life for the middle class.
@@guntherkramer9242 There won't be a middle class, Jobs will be gone in future.
Yep we have a lot of newcomers that have never paid in to the system soaking up all the resources. And I know I’m paying more tax because of it and getting worse service.
You shouldnt get special right just because you were born first. Older generations are the ones who messed it up they dont get to decide the fix. They care more about a strong military whatever that is.
You pay tax? If 100% taxation is considered slavery, at which % would you consider yourself to be free?
The problem is much worse than that. Look at the big picture. TECHNOLOGY.
@solairethedarksoul who are the newcomers you refer to? Undocumented workers are paying taxes, FICA, and Medicare tax but can't collect on it. Can't collect SSDI if they become disabled. They need to take the cap off FICA.
@@lyndachele oh sweet pay tax once, twice three times, maybe on a 711 pay cheque,
Full benefits. I pay my whole life and have to wait 6-8 hours in an emergency room to just get looked at.
Saudi Arabia has UBI - but there's a trade off absolutely no say in how the state is run... as in the end of democracy
That UBI is for Saudi citizens only.
Well we're halfway there, then. Just waiting for the UBI part...
In other words communism.
They can do it becuase of the excess oil money and small population. Its basically to keep the drones happy so they dont cause trouble. Down the road when that oil money runs out they will be in for a revolt.
Saudi Arabia is a monarchy.
Many native american tribes essentially have UBI, and have for a while, we should check in on how thats working out.
Well, they invented the EV and are trying to...
No wait... _That's other people._
Almost like UBI is an incentive to do nothing.
When given opportunities, say casinos, they seem to do pretty well.
@@janineclemons746The Indian Reservations make the urban ghettos look like suburban neighborhood.
@@darbyheavey406 I grew up in rural Arkansas over fifty years ago. Poverty was rampant. People farmed usually with mules, hunted and fished. Most qualified for government commodities. There weren't a lot of economic opportunities. A lower standard of living wasn't shameful it was just reality. We ultimately started a dairy. It was marginally profitable though we worked hard. We unfortunately started just before big dairy launched. Even hard work isn't an assurance of financial success. You need the right idea at the right time and a lot of luck.
That is hardly 'Universal' is it?
Isaiah 5:8
Woe to those who join house to house; They add field to field, Till there is no place Where they may dwell alone in the midst of the land!
Excellent example, thank you!!
Being productive is a major contributor to HAPPINESS. People who WANT UBI for themselves, are asking to be useless, and less happy, and are less likely to wind up with a sense of self esteem. They don't realize this, but UBI will hurt them. The necessity to be productive in order to make money for food, clothing and shelter, is a major incentive that often leads to happiness.
What about all the backstabbing ,jealousy mean behaviour of humans in the workplace, the loss of health by stress and harsh work conditions, not to mention working like a dog without getting paid .that isn't making me happy .I would more happy with ubi and spending my time on my hobbies than working to make someone else rich.
@@366317 Do something entrepreneurial with your hobbies, my friend. Find a way to make something that people will want to buy. Start a cool, passionate little business and then you will be working for yourself. That's the free market. YOU own the means of production, not the government, and not the factory owner. Bring your passion to the world. And you will make the world a better place. That is what freedom allows. UBI removes the incentive for you to help the world with your own special passion and talent.
Not only is it a bad idea, it has been tried in Canada twice and in Finland as well. In Canada, the program became too costly, no data was collected to see progress, and politicians used it as a gimmick to get elected. In Finland, there was no advantage or movement out of poverty for those individuals who collected. It just became free money.
When the government starts giving you "free" money, you will see in increases in drug addictions and death. Politicians will use it as a means to get elected by promising to raise it every election year.
It's a bad idea and that's why leftists and socialists love it.
I am not sure what tests you are talking about but i did google them and both tests concluded small but positive results but also discovered complex challenges such a system would face since it would need huge overhauls in both state finance and the work market.
@@kenji214245 It's inflationary and it will only increase inequalities.
If you reward slackers and punish hard workers; it naturally creates an incentive to produce less and reward squalor.
@@vladimirofsvalbard9477 Yes and no there is a compromise to be made and we already have that as it is.
Minimalists not wanting to work living on small jobs already exists and the UBI models so far are only meant to cover basic needs so if you want any luxury stuff or splurge you have to work to earn the extra. Alongside that UBI would remove majority of all government based benefit systems which would save govs billions on social spending programs.
The government gives free money to corporations and wealthy individuals all the time. Commit financial malfeasance on a huge scale, what do you get? You get a million dollar bonus. Until everyone is treated the same we will never have a meritocracy. What we have is a very corrupt oligarchy run by monopolistic corporations.
@@kenji214245 This is why it's essential that the government stop protecting corporations.
If you take away the 'goodie bags' for big business; magically small competitors can tear them apart and produce lower prices and better quality.
It would also raise GDP and stimulate creativity.
The longer you let these business giants get bailed out and soak up the currency; it creates the situation that we're in (low GDP with high debt in an eventual hyperinflation economy).
A very insightful comment from Dr Weinstein in regards to the fundamental flaw in communism: it rewards those who contribute least and punishes those who contribute most. That line alone made this video worth the time invested.
You arent actually harmed by others doing better.
That's strictly speaking from a financial standpoint. It ignores the entirety of the rest of humanity and the status that can be derived from achieving things. Consider that children grow up on UBI provided by their parents. It's not the different.
We have never seen true communism. Lennonism doesn't work .
When you ask a capitalist, you get a capitalist answer, when yku ask a former communist you get CIA dibble, when you ask a polititian you get sales. The undergrkumd railrkad risked life and limb tk free slaves. We are all slaves right now. Douglas gave yku an answer from half a century ago. Verbatum. BTW There are studies that show when people don't need to worl, they eventually gravitate toward joyful work and have higher production.
Will you please find some of that and bring it on ylur show? Hint: There is an artist with a center in upstate NY, that offers creativity retreats. The retreat begins with 8 hours of boredom.❤
@@someguyusa Communist tends to have a certain superficial appeal to those who demand things like equity and fairness. Equity in itself is a complete myth on so many levels but it makes for a good sound bite in the mouths of politicians. We have the evidence now; the communist experiment has been repeated many times over the last century and it's been disastrous on every occasion. We know what happens now, we have the data, there is no excuse for going down that route once more.
The US can barely afford to give 3 stimulus checks during the lockdown and those checks were not even a huge amount. I dont see a UBI on a monthly
They couldn't afford those checks. The money came from a printing press, hence the 20% inflation the last three years.
@darylfoster7944 what money? Money doesnt exist anymore, its binary on a screen.
The economy will be much larger as A.I. progresses and creates more efficient ways of doing things.
And not all the money printed during that time period were stimulus checks to working people.... your comment is very shortsighted. No clue why people gave it so many thumbs up.
@@darylfoster7944 Billionaires need to be taxed more.
It gave more to support shareholders of large corporations thru much larger giveaways. Also people for the first time in their lives got to wake up at home without going to work for weeks on end. It was like they had their lives to live much like the wealthy who have never worked or the poverty stricken who can't work or never have.
Nothing is free. Especially from anyone with money. Concerning money.
A ubi isn't free. It's en exchange. Taxes are free.
That oligarchs use ubi to try to instigate digital identity doesn't change the fact that every successful company from musk to the small business man benefits from a ubi type payment paid by taxpayers, except not available to everyone, creating an apartheid.
A ubi could easily be implemented with a vat tax displacing welfare.
@@harnessriscallous7466 sorry if this is a silly question but what's it an exchange for?
@@ProfoundFamiliarity taxes.
They're not supposed to all go to rich corporations and bombing brown kids.
They're supposed to be an exchange for all citizens to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
And a ubi is not charity or welfare. It's literally just a blanket pay out equally to all.
Basically, for anyone who wants wealth distribution because our govt has been draining our tax base for forever wars
...
You can either trust the govt to create a complicated system of welfare, or do a ubi distribution.
Now granted, if not passed as an amendment and tied to gdp and a few other caveats, like any other tool of wealth distribution, it will be coopted for control.
@@ProfoundFamiliarity its for an economy
With UBI there needs to also be massive therapy. There is a reason why people get super lazy and demotivated at the start of UBI - they’re traumatized from the system, they just got unplugged from it.
I've spent the last 35 years getting setup to grow most of my own food. I would recommend this to anyone who can manage it.
you are bang on. The more of us that can do this and the more we can build communities that become less reliant on the system the better.
@@beccymalloy If the economy really collapses, the goodwill we've built up w/ neighbors will be our currency. I always try to produce more than I need so I can give some away. Cast your bread upon the waters, and it will come back to you.
As an age pensioner, I can assure you that getting paid to do nothing is great, just so long as you can find something useful to do to fill your time.
Can you travel anywhere in the world first class? Eat the best foods on the planet? Buy the best vehicle to drive around in that is available at the moment? Live in an apartment in a penthouse in any city of the world?
@@dijonmaizeno.
And as long as you can find other people to do all the work you need done, like health care, growing food, providing energy and roads and infrastructure. Less good if no one is working.
Value is based on scarcity and utility. Giving anything away devalues it. UBI just means the "bottom" will get reset upwards. Give anyone who asks $25,0000 to buy a home and watch the price of homes increase by much more than $25,000.
I have seen this first hand in my family. If you give some people basic life support… that is what they will adjust to live with and survive. They will not try to get more. They will be forever dependent and never try to get more.
Those that try to get more, will resent those that don’t try to get more.
And yet most UBI tests done which is about 160 of them globally saw that majority of people would be more likely to get a job to increase the cash flow to afford a more luxurious lifestyle and take more chances like starting their own companies or move to places where there was more work options. So it does sound more like a family problem on your end.
@@kenji214245 What makes you think there will be many jobs left, People are in for shock in the next decade.
Bruh just give me my UBI and i ll figure out the rest, all this philosophizing....
@@kenji214245 nope… I witnessed it my entire life. When someone knows a freebie is coming, they also don’t respect it.
The kids given cars, wrecked them speeding or crashing when drunk… they didn’t care about destroying what was given to them, only if they would get caught. Rarely is it go to give anyone something for free, if they know they will keep getting that something for free.
I hope that this is the beginning of a very important discussion of ideas about our world today.
Bravo for this!
Bret thanks, you’re doing a really great job!
What an incredible way to walk about Woke culture- one of the best ways I have heard
It’s becoming just like the book “atlas shrugged” by Ayn Rand. Accurately describes what would happen with an equity type system. When everyone is an eater and everyone gets the same irregardless of effort the creators become disenfranchised. Innovation and creation stops, the smart and useful of society drop out rather than be taken advantage of and everything falls into disrepair. Eventually all the producers, creators and the knowledgeable ones of society break away and form their own underground system while the rest keep going toward their own destruction. That book should be required reading in every school.
Nah. The lessons should be taught, but the book itself is crap.
@@darrennew8211what makes you say that
@@AsianSupport The characters don't abide by their own rules. The objectivist-god-author makes sure everything works out perfectly even when the heroes do stupid shit. The heroes don't follow their own rules when they're interacting with the bad guys.
For example, Dagny leaves to die all the railroad workers who protected the rails she was riding on. The copper baron guy defrauds investors, intentionally misleading them about the value of his purchases. The pirate guy is a pirate - he sinks ships and leaves sailors to die in the middle of the north atlantic and shells buildings on the land with no knowledge of who might be inside, miraculously neither of which causes any harm to innocent people. Dagny also murders in cold blood a guard who tries to actually make an intelligent decisions because she knows if he gathers the information he needs she'll be arrested; she then steps over his lifeless body as if it's a dog in the street. Every single hero was an awful and dishonorable and unlikeable person if you read it from the POV of anyone other than the author.
Oh, and she has no idea how the legal system works, and the only way the "heroes" get away is via magic.
I thoroughly enjoyed the irony in this post. 😂😂
BTW Ayn Rand thought all the Workers were "Parasites" to, only the Industrialists were worthy People, lets not look to someone like her who hated 99% of humanity for advice!
When in my twenties, in the seventies I realised that if everyone became millionaires we would all be penniless.
But if everyone produces more than they consumed, we'd all be "poor" but materially unbelievably rich. Ultimately money/wealth has limited utility. You wear one pair of trousers and eat one lunch, and all that wealth would just be used to develop things that would incrementally better human life.
Thank you for the clip. Now, I am interested in listening to him more.
1.Callous disdain 2.Learned helplessness. How about loss of identity for #3? Say I'm a plumber, part of a skilled community. Not the only skill, but vital. That's who I am (or was...)
Graduated college in 2009, fucked from the start...
😂😂😂
that’s funny .
u still have a chanse man . don’t quit .
I already give half of my paycheck to the government so there is no way that I'll gladly accept useless people to benefit from it even more. Helping out others has its limits and we're already over the tolerable.
U already do. Ubi works when robots doing all the work. Ubi is everyone gets it and alone pays for rent food medicinal costs. I dont agree with him here.
@@nikitaw1982 explain where the money comes from please
@@JimmyJimmyRiddle its welfare for the broke, tax return for everyone else. I did. The machines doing all the labor. Chatgpt and Boston dynamics parlour robot are both like a toddler atm. 10 years they won't need immigrant Labor. Better a UBI then democrats starting a global war to cull the masses. They are already playing divide and conquer to set things up.
It ain't the poor people that are the problem. It's the multi millionaires, billionaires, and big corporations cheating on their taxes that are the real problem. Ask yourself, if you're paying half your paycheck in taxes why aren't the wealthy and huge corporations paying a higher percentage in taxes than you? Doesn't sound fair to me. But morons like the weinsteins would direct your ire to some poor people getting a few bucks while the wealthy are literally stealing TRILLIONS out the back door.
Only half? IN what paradise do you live? I'm being robbed of ca 97 % of the fruit of my labour through income tax, consumption tax, tax on savings and, one of the biggest factors, inflation through currency devaluation.
Money can be easily printed and distributed. But if there is not an increase in production, there will be nothing to buy, prices will go up and everyone's money will be worthless
If current modern industry decided to go all out in production rates we could outproduce majority of hardware goods demands within 1 year to a fraction of the costs the consumers would collectively pay to get it.
The thing that people in general don't understand is that someone always pays. Either pay upfront or you pay when the consequences happen. The original problem is people wanting cheap products and not realizing that cheap products come with problems. On the topic of UBI it would be nice if you automatically got a check if you worked a full week and your paycheck put you below the poverty level
the cost of divorce is too high for men
The cost of marriage is pretty high for men. The women take your life, expect you to make them rich, and in return all you get is fed and . . . . . . other stuff.
We just had a test case for UBI in the US. It came with the pandemic. Multiple rounds of checks were sent to people, essentially UBI checks. What happened? Money flooded into the economy. Business owners massively raised prices, because they could. A huge wealth transfer went from the struggling to the rich. Businesses had massive profits. The wealth gap grew. The national debt increased tremendously. And regular people are more in debt now than they were before. We don't have to have a theoretical "thought experiment" on what would happen with UBI. It was just tested in the US a couple of years ago. We can see what happened.
Easy solution to fix this is a wealth tax on assets owned over a certain amount so it doesn't affect working people. All the money raised from price increases will be re-collected from the wealth tax.
And one other comment. That is NOT why the wealth gap grew. The wealth gap grew because a lot of that printed money went into the pockets of wealthy people to maintain jobs. Instead, it was used to buy up all sorts of assets such as stocks, housing, crypto, etc.... That is what caused the wealth gap to widened.
Please get your facts straight. And yes, UBI will be necessary when there are no more jobs for average people to earn a living.
@@henrythegreatamerican8136 My facts are straight. I didn't say it was the ONLY reason why the wealth gap increased. UBI will not work because of basic economic money flow principles. The money would temporarily be in the hands of poor people and they would spend the money. Spending money puts it in the hands of the owners. Owners don't have to spend the money. They can save it, invest it, pay themselves the money, do stock buybacks etc. all of the things that you said. And because there is more "printed money" in the economy than there would be without UBI, owners can raise the prices and the poor people will shortly be no better off than they were before they got UBI.
💯
There's no way to test UBI now. The scenario for UBI should be one where there is massive AI-related job loss
"Useless eaters" is true though. Not providing value while consuming will destroy us.
providing what, you mean the share holding elon musk s of the world.
Other people doing better doesnt actually harm you.
@@BlackJesus8463 When it comes at the expense of others, yes, it does. Why should we have to work harder so you don't? We have to provide value, but you don't? Grow up.
@@cosmicmusicreynolds3266 Your response makes no sense.
That’s impossible. They can’t consume unless they are causing theft or someone is giving them something (freely) so useless eaters is an oxymoron and what the interviewee is correctly identifying as wrong.
What he said at the end is true because I saw people posting comments about how unfair it is for the middle class to have a good life. Unfair? They work hard for it. Of course, some cheated to get what they wanted. That's why we need to maintain a safety net for the non-achievers. Example, when you harvest, do not collect all. Leave some for the widow and orphans.
Good interview. Brett is on fire, here.
Isn’t this already happening with disability (sometimes fraudulent), welfare, etc? I’ve watched neighbors on disability “chill out” all day, while I go to work- paying taxes that help to fund their “disability” (this comment is only meant for fraudulent disability where an able-bodied, functional adult is collecting funds).
Yes.
Add in the lawyers who help people get those checks. Who pays them? A big scam to get people reliant on Big Daddy, which is designed simply to make the Powers more money.
Yeah, chilling out on the highest state run disability benefit of 1600 a month sounds awesome, especially when you have some sort of disability that requires more effort than the average person to qualify for said benefits.
Then voting for higher taxes and socialist policies. Im not against helping the actual needy but its a giant grift and now we have 20-30 million illegals that get priority over vets and other americans
Not all disabilities are physical. I have paranoid schizophrenia which qualifies me for disability. I've tried working and my symptoms make it hard to function something even on medication
My dad was actually encouraged by his doctor to go on disability even though he was capable of working. Definitely made for an "awesome" childhood when your dad sits at home all day making $900 a month and sometimes lacking the basics. The medical system in this country needs a massive overhaul as well.
Theres no limit to the money spent by the rich to help keep you poor
Communist sentiment didn't arise from a failed meritocracy, humans have desired collectivist values for thousands of years. Most people want you to do well but not better than them, it doesn't matter if you live in a democracy or a communist dictatorship, humans have always been the same. The tall poppy always gets cut down. The straw that usually breaks the camels back that ushers in socialist/communist policies are the very same things the people voted for in the first place, equal opportunities. Everyone is fine when the opportunities are equal but when the outcomes are vastly different and when it becomes clear as day to the people, they will begin to resent the "winners" despite everyone's lives being objectively better than it was 50 years ago.
Let us not have winners, all paid the same, or as buddhist company in UK paid by your need, the owner got less pay than some of his workers because they had children so needed more. He was single. Simples
Price's Law bud.
The margins have to be balanced at about 80/20 from an income standpoint. 50/50 results in devastation and 99/1 results in devastation.
This is WHY you have to have destabilizing recessions. It reshuffles the deck between have's and have nots. If you create a Keynesian (drown recessions with inflation) system like we have now. Then the inequalities run out of control and people blame the free market.
"people for whom that doesn't work" @5:50
'That doesn't work' means everyone who is not #1. In the quest for power, there can be only one. Abel and Cain. Old story
Brilliant, succinct summation of the problem with meritocracy (5:35) vs. the problem with communism (6:35). Each represents "going to an extreme to avoid an extreme". I wish the discussion would've then turned to what the latest and most promising proposals are, to better synthesize the positive points of each, while eliminating the negative - the "mixed economy" (which most countries at some point at least attempt). Maybe the full episode does discuss that - I'll have to check it out. But as it stands, I see too many people just cheerleading for one side or the other, without making any genuine effort to try to bridge the divide, or to even acknowledge that the opposing view has some merit in some/any aspect.
Although Prof. Weinstein isn't wrong in his thoughts about the impossibility of communism, he is incomplete here: the most fundamental reason why communism is impossible is the lack of a price system, prices aggregate all information in an economy, they are a market product at the end of a long line of human activity
Its not a lack of a price system, its the childishly ignorant price system they use.
Communism fails for the same reason Capitalism does they just do it at different speeds and with different perspectives and that reason is called human greed and ignorance.
Exactly right on. These conversations should be happening on a daily bases. The younger generation need a face slap of reality. Even the old puppet masters need to come to reality of the truth.
Socialism… stealing from the productive members and giving to the bums.
You need to leave your neighbors alone.
Did you have all of your needs provided to you by your parents when you were growing up? Did you still become a productive member of society? Well, that's pretty much the same thing as UBI, imo.
Basis.
The younger generation needs what? The younger generation has figured out that the economy is broken and they ain't playing.
Bret is a great example of this. Remember academic freedom? Back when people who were smart were allowed to conduct actual research in universities. That isn't allowed now, you need to publish tons of BS papers so smart people know they can't progress in academia.
If you are a brilliant person who can come up with some new product or idea, you know you're gonna have to sell your rights to some vast corporation or barely survive... And this same pattern repeats elsewhere. It's just not worth it to do anything good.
Sam Altman's experiment was an epic failure.
Solutions are in Beijing, BRI Forum cooperation in Agricultural-STEM Healthcare-Infrastructure Domestic manufacturing-Poverty alleviation... CGTN The Point-Hub-Heat, Shanghai Eye, Reporterfy Media-Cyrus Janssen, RT International Africa Summit-SPIEF
My understanding is that UBI was extensively trialled (in the 50s-60s I think) and was a roaring success on all levels. Granted the 50's was a very different time to today, but people were generally freed up to do things that they loved the they couldn't afford to do before because they had to get buy (play music, get creative, volunteer, take on low-paid work that they enjoyed) And it's very different to the current social services systems because with UBI you don't need to employ thousands of pen pushers to administer those out of work (huge saving right there). Don't forget there are millions of lazy, bored, disinterested people IN work today!
It's granted as a success by the results that the creators are looking for. This has always been the inherent flaw in experiments.
Rat utopia didn't work out too well.
I love your response, it pretty much sums it all up
I think you just dehumanized your neighbors, bruh.
@BlackJesus8463 just curious if you know the experiment he is talking about? Because this comment was not about calling people "rats" and dehumanising people, if you understand his reference point.
@@BlackJesus8463 Please read about the real-world experiment that he was referencing. It contained useful lessons for humanity.
And now you know what is really happening at the top.
I get what this guy is saying but a future with robots and AI I just can’t see us having jobs.
Yeah, that's the perfect system for governmental control. Money coming from the sky for good, obedient citizens.
Nobody acutally needs an economy. It's a scam perpetuated by sociopaths
Exactly, but you could own a robot that can work for you in Capitalist society or a small factory of robots.
In Communism the state/party would own the company making the robot and the ai as well as the robots and ai. You would then have to pray to whatever god you know that they don't revoke your party membership/citizenship.
They've been saying this for 40+ years.
All they need to do, is drop the standard work week from 40 hrs, to 30, then 20, then 10. We'll end up like in Star Trek where people contribute, but have lots of time to do what they want.
Exactly. And he would agree with you.
A LOT of people work hard and can't earn money.
I agree. When people agree on what qualifies as paid labor (which is harder than you might think), there turns out to be no correlation between how many hours a person works a week and how much money they make (and certainly not between how much wealth their assets generate).
If you have ever been on food stamps and government assistance you will know that it is very difficult to get off of. My experience was that I was the only income provider for my wife and three children. I was climbing the ranks in my profession and eventually came to the point where my income would disqualify my family from government assistance. When I got the raise that pushed me over the limit it was like taking a $15,000 annual pay cut. My wife and I knew it was coming and had planned our budget accordingly, but it still hurt and made life incredibly hard.
Unfortunately, the way that the human mind works, welfare often incentivizes people to not cross the income threshold and to stay perpetually poor.
No economic solution will work until the route cause of greed and psychopathy is addressed or even recognized.
The landlords will just raise the rents to absorb that UBi just like they did with the COVID checks. The shops will raise their prices to capture that UBI just like they did with the COVID checks.
Which is why there needs to be a rent control.
@@aceyage Which will cause less investment in housing and a shortage in supply. ALL price controls to lead to shortage in supply. SMH!
@@mrpyther5944 Not necessarily. A case is happening in Atlanta where nearly all rental companies were using the same exact third-party algorithm to determine prices. Which is essentially just price fixing at that point and needs government intervention. To make it worse the algorithm sets the price at such a high point that these places can maintain 70% occupancy and make more money. We also aren't talking about using the approach to selling cars. Providing shelter, a basic human right, should be held to a higher standard.
@@davida730you do you realize that over half the rental properties are not owned by "rental companies"? Those of us who are private landlords own over half of the supply, and I can assure you we are not fixing prices using any types of algorithms.
Also, UBI has only ever been tried in small populations. That's why people think it works, because there's no major disruption to the bottom of the market. Once you end up with an entire population receiving ubi, there's simply not enough supply to go around. The problem right now is we do not have enough housing in this country. Giving everybody piles of money doesn't solve that. It simply makes the existing inventory more expensive.
@@sidwhiting665 Rental properties and total units are very different things. Jim down the street who owns 2 rental houses isn't the same as whatever corporation owning a couple 200 unit apartment complexes.
The stupid thing about UBI during the pandemic is they gave it to EVERYONE, far beyond those who actually needed it, and the people who didn't need it invested it in the stock market, causing assets to go up and the class division to worsen.
It's Universal. As soon as you start putting rules and limits on it you naturally create bureaucracy to determine who doesn't need it. I want you to think about the negative version of ubi which are poor taxes, like speeding tickets, the lottery, any flat rate payment that is meaningful to the poor, but insignificant to the rich. I don't think that the rich were meaningfully impacted by a flat $1500 payment, I think that the inflation caused by printing the money was wayyy more meaningful to the rich. Or the control on the economy by lockdowns.
Yes but the rich do pay more in taxes so it should even out
it was a debt inflation proxy .. anyway .. they could have given food coupons
I was in healthcare. I was making more money than ever working overtime and hazard pay. Then the government sends me a four figure check for no reason. Crazy times indeed lol
@@Greenface35yes,you were a hero,then they fabed a jab and fired you for not being compliant and you became a zero.
Fantastic Guest! Great Interview! Bret Weinstein is Right! Smartest man in the room!
This interviews is the simplest form to what is occurring currently every one needs to watch this interviews
Thank you for this reasoned opinion.
So what happens if everything is automized. duh
Good luck to 70% who will never found a job and making 1300 a month off the govt. That is what is coming in the next 15 years.
15% of population will control 95% of the wealth
I do not support UBI. As an American I believe that there should not be a dollar amount given to you but rather an amount that the government cannot take from you. I talked to a guy who was paying child support. It was high enough that be could not afford a place to live so he lived in his truck. The issued a warrant for failing to pay and they arrested him and had is truck towed. Everything he had was in it and he could not afford to get it out of impound because they had already taken all his money when they processed him into jail. He ended up in,prison for being poor. I think this is a horrible situation and that the government should not take anyones money unless they have a basic income to support themselves. An income threshold.
But what do you do when automation and AI become so highly efficient that there will be less relevant jobs than there will be people able to do them. Should we just toss them to the streets? Create fake jobs just to justify it or simply give them enough food and some kind of 3D printed budget box home to live in like some dystopian sci-fi??
True but who pays for the child, the government if he does not. But you should be left with ability to make a living, as you say perhaps a %, but that still means the government pick up the rest.
Instead of giving money we should give basic needs. Nutritional food yes, money no. Basic housing yes, money no. Education yes, money no. Healthcare yes, money no.
Everything else than basic needs is worked for. There's a way to make it work. Everyone starts from the same spot, yes. Everyone ends up at same spot, no. Work determines that. No excuses.
Electricity should be freely available for all to use.
We should all be allowed to live on our own family land for FREE no mortgage no council property taxes "rates" no rent.
Water should be FREE no cost - it comes from the Earth the rivers the seas
You care more about money than you do people.
You no the potential of AI to basically provide everyone with individualized education and health/ medical care. Then there are already AI devices that for a few hundred dollars that cook food almost as good as professionals.
It’s also 5 -10 years until cultured meat is widely available and less expensive than meat today
Electricity is free ... once you buy your solar panels. If you need someone else to make it and send it to you, not so much. Water can be free if you live on a lake or river or can dig a well. Piped water treated and monitored for safety, again, not so much.
@@alanj9978 if you live somewhere with high humidity you can condense drinking water from the air. Even in a dessert with little rain with a normal size roof.you can catch enough rain water to get through a year.
It‘s necessary to introduce the Unconditional Basic Income and we have to go even a step further. We have to share more and give things away or allow to use them 4 free on the other hand we have to learn to consume and produce less. Wealth is more important than rich.
Whoa! I’d never heard the term “useless eaters” before. I looked up the quote on the topic and it makes me both mad and sad. Unfortunately, this is reflected in the reality of how we care for other people. 2020 shined the light there and people have mostly looked away. God help us.
He seems to not understand. Everything he said revolves around the idea that the world will be like it always has been. “People” needing to provide value. But we are loving past that. We are moving into an era where we have an army of AI slave robots to do EVERYTHING that we don’t specifically want done by a human.
Fly fishing guide? We want a human to do that.
Elementary school teacher? A one-on-one robot teacher issued to each student likely would be able to do a far FAR better job of ensuring that person is educated.
Someone helping install gutters on a building? Robot work. Someone making a fine art painting. Human work. Someone fixing the plumbing in my house, stocking shelves, or fixing my car? Robot work. Someone playing live music? Human work.
We are going to essentially create a system where you can go onto an Amazon-type site and order anything you want. The only reason we’ll need money is to “throttle human desire to reasonable levels”.
That is…we don’t need some teenage (or any age) moron going to the site and ordering 5 jet skis for him and his friends today…only to decide he doesn’t like jet skiing before they are delivered so they end up stacked in his back yard.
Money will be “anti-hoarding” pills.
So yeah…everyone will be given money at like… $60,000 a year ($5,000 a month) in today’s dollars. And parents will be given that on behalf of their child until the kid is 18 to incentivize having kids.
It won’t be “unlimited” money. But for a married couple? It would be fine.
And don’t bring up inflation. The AI Revolution would be DEflatinary and pushing prices down. The amount paid to each citizen would be calculated by how much the prices fell in the previous quarter and the. Determine how much would need to be printed to push the price back up to level. Then distribute that printed money evenly to each citizen.
Learned helplessness? Nobody worries about that with the children of rich people. I think we’ll be fine. This idea that people have to be miserable and struggle to be happy is broken thinking.
And if you are a Christian and reading this and you believe that…that suffering is necessary for happiness…then what happens in the eternal state? When there is no suffering? I think people will be plenty happy. Which means suffering is NOT necessary for happiness. So if you claim to be a Christian…purge that crap idea from your thinking from now to forever.
They’ll be comfortable, out of their minds on drugs and, utterly useless.
Thanks for the perfect update. I really appreciate the dedication in each video you post.The first step to successful investing is determining your goals and risk tolerance, Most people you see as wealth at a glance, a great career, purpose is the result of hard work and remains over time. There are no shortcuts to getting rich but there are smart ways to go about it. Now I can say that thanks to Ms. Clara Burn I am improving my understanding of this whole world and making new big profits every week.
She is the best, honestly, I benefit from it too. This inflation has taught people the importance of multiple incomes. Investments help a lot.
I am impressed by the way expert Clara Burn conducts business and makes statements. And I really like her quick answer
She is regarded as a genius in her area and works for Empower Financial Services.She is well knowledgeable about financial markets.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, you don't need to have a hefty fund or ultra deep pockets like mutual fund to start investing. I initially invested $8k I was making return of the investment plus interests.
How can I participate in this? Like how do I contact this adviser please?
The free housing, education, and medical care that we (in the Western countries) lavish on asylum seekers is a form of UBI. They enter the USA, UK, France, etc illegally, and are then entitled to free housing, education, medicine, etc. They get to live at the expense of the people, which is pure compassion and selflessness. It would not be possible without government.
It is not pure compassion/selflessness when give to one at the expense of another.
California's legislature is trying to pass a bill to pay illegal aliens $25K to help them buy a house. The consensus is that this bill will make it to Governor Newsom's desk where he will sign it. I love living in California except for the politics which I have to just ignore or I'll go goofy.
True in a way, but we also do let them havr jobs. And would you try to leave the UK if it was as bad as their country, war torn, taliban, no food, lack o water, no health care or would you stay in the UK, Not only that we disrupted the countries in the first place or helped to destabilise them.
It’s neither compassion nor selfless since the taxes are collected under threat of violence.
As a blue collar worker of meritocracy, i can say the benefit of my competent labor was not compensated at the same proportional level as my bosses, in fact generally speaking 35 to 40 percent less. Now, taking into account the 3 to 4 years of lean times we predictably incur, them keeping us on is an equitable trade. Not everything that seems evil is, the most evil people in the world are the ones who want compensation from the people they claim to represent, ie unions and provide nothing anymore.
He's right. I agree. Thanks.
There's already learned helplessness.. we are given no other option than to be slaves for food and shelter! I refuse to be a slave
homeless are pretty free
@@TurdFergusen oh yeah free to sleep on a park bench and eat sh*t off a shingle like a feral animal but not free to live off the land, make shelter etc
So you're mortgage free, dept free, zero taxes?
@@ONYX-365 I am yes, not a single bill
@@TurdFergusen free to live like a feral animal yes.. not free to make a shelter, not free to live off the land
UNIVERSAL Basic Income is a big problem. However UNCONDITIONAL Basic Income may save human society.
Universal means everyone gets the slave yoke. Unconditional means you cannot be targeted.
All the money that that a country 'earns' should be distributed as a DIVIDEND to CITIZENS then RESIDENTS have to be taxed to pay for government expenditure.
UBI does NOT passivate, it makes ALL work benefit the individual because it is accrued on TOP of the UBI that cannot be witheld.. Means tested benefits PASSIVATE because work diminished your benefits leaving you in a BENEFIT TRAP-
UBI is BS; it'll just raise the basic prices of housing and food rise to consume it. It's just pure inflation.
Countries don't earn money, individuals and businesses do. You're planning to confiscate all privately earned wealth and redistribute it? GL with that. Nobody will produce anything.
You do realize that exactly the same thing but with extra steps right?
Feeding humans is just like feeding wildlife. It's better to work for it.
There are many ways to contribute to society that do not generate income necessarily. Art. Kindness. Helping others. Meditation. Parenting.
How sad that many believe that our only sense of value and contribution is about money
Meritocracy actually does take care of, even reward those who fail initially. Operative term INITIALLY. Meritocracy gives strong credit to those who show perseverance. Those who show honest effort. Those who keep trying. Look to those crying the loudest about meritocracy not caring FOR THEM. And you'll find a recurring theme. Either they harp on the BUT WHAT IF I FAIL and so never try at all. Or they only ever try ONCE, and that usually only half heartedly at most. And when that doesn't result in a smashing success they give up entirely. I don't recall who said it, or who got credit for saying it, but it's true. The Success has failed more times than the Failure has tried.
The true solution is, Universal Basic Education and Universal Basic Job!
"There is a wise old saying, "If you give a person a fish you can feed them for a day. When you teach a person to fish, they can feed themselves for a life time!"
what about when AI takes all our jobs?
Agree. But I will go further. I am all for free enterprise. What puzzles me however is WHY do just a FEW want so much......and MORE? We read daily that s0-and-so is worth for instance 100 Billion....or more. These are the types funny enough that ADVOCATES "just a little"....for EVERYBODY. I ask myself. How many lobsters can one eat per day? How many top class bottles of Champagne? How many yachts / Ferraris etc? Or does it become an OBSESSION....a way of life....to have MORE? How about putting a limit on what an individual can be worth? And whilst getting there still have the right to be an entrepreneur? Just a thought from me.
give a man a fish and you control the supply. Teach a man to fish and he will overfish his limit. Enough people will do this that the supply of fish will be decimated. Human nature at work.
@@martinbisschoff988 You asked why do a few want so much? The type of person who is extremely financially successful is the type of person who is also very competitive and driven. For example, Elon Musk had already become very wealthy several years ago, and could easily have just sat back and lived off of his many millions. But he was bored and restless. So he started Tesla, and SpaceX, and the Boring Company, etc. etc.
Also, for some people (I don't know about Musk), at some point, it becomes about keeping score with other wealthy people. They literally try to get ahead of some other rich person or persons for the sake of competing, or sometimes simply for the personal challenge of finding out what they are capable of. You often hear of runners just going for their personal best times. Why do people climb Mount Everest? Because it's there and presents a challenge. Why do people play games? Because people love to compete.
One more thought. Would you seriously want to limit someone like Musk from creating new companies, industries, jobs, and wealth for all of humanity? Have you (or anyone else) ever gotten a job from a poor person?
If you think the solution is UBI and UBJ, I would invite you to study the Soviet Union. It had both of those. The joke among the citizens was that they pretended to work, and the government pretended to pay them.
If you want another example, you could read the firsthand account of early years of the Plymouth Colony in the US written by its first governor, William Bradford. They tried communism at first, and many starved to death. They switched to private ownership, and things improved dramatically.
To paraphrase the late Margaret Thatcher, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Those receiving income should volunteer or learn as students etc
Weinstein’s critique of Universal Basic Income (UBI) hinges on the notion that it could foster jealousy and antagonism among those who continue to generate wealth. While this perspective is a valid concern, it is somewhat narrow and overlooks the broader, more nuanced implications of UBI, especially in the context of rapidly evolving technologies and societal needs.
Firstly, the premise that wealth generators will inevitably become envious of those receiving UBI assumes a zero-sum view of wealth and societal value. This perspective neglects the possibility of a future where economic roles and value generation are transformed. As automation and artificial intelligence increasingly perform tasks traditionally done by humans, the conventional dichotomy of wealth generators versus UBI recipients may become obsolete. The nature of work and wealth production could shift so dramatically that the very foundation of these societal categories might need re-evaluation. In such a context, UBI could be seen not as a source of division but as a NECESSARY adaptation to ensure social stability in a World where people would otherwise starve.
Furthermore, Weinstein’s argument does not fully account for the societal changes brought about by technological advancements. The advent of AI and mechanization could lead to a future where traditional labour is significantly reduced or even rendered obsolete. In this scenario, the issue is not merely about balancing income but about addressing fundamental changes in the nature of work itself. UBI could be a pragmatic response to these changes, ensuring that all individuals have a safety net in an era where traditional forms of employment become increasingly scarce.
Another critical consideration is the potential for societal harm if individuals are left without meaningful engagement. In my mind the real danger lies in a future where individuals, deprived of purposeful work, experience a loss of meaning and social isolation. If people are left without productive avenues to channel their energies and talents, this can indeed lead to societal malaise and instability. UBI, when coupled with robust support for community engagement, education, and personal development, could provide a framework for individuals to explore new forms of contribution and fulfilment.
In essence, the challenge is not just to mitigate jealousy but to proactively shape a society where individuals are encouraged to pursue meaningful activities, regardless of traditional work structures. UBI can serve as a foundation for this new societal paradigm, ensuring that economic changes do not translate into social fragmentation. Rather than viewing UBI as a divisive element, it should be seen as part of a broader strategy to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world, promoting stability in the face of uncertainty.
exactly! They assume UBI is the only thing that changes and then list all the worst bs capitalism has done as a reason it wont work! lol
How many welfare recipients today strive to pursue meaningful activities?
I've been saying that for years. Hopefully, the oligarchs wake up, but this total lack of work ethic is insane and I can't Imagine how bad it could become
One of the major malfunctions with UBI is that there is no incentive for any business or individual to be greedy when the end result of being greedy is stolen from you and given to people who don’t even want to work.
I do want to be clear. I am not against helping people out who need help. I think that a good society is one where if you biff your life, that there are people who will help you right the ship and get your life in order. I think things like Medicaid should be expanded on coverage and that it needs to be more comprehensive, that welfare and food stamps should be tapered off instead of cut out because people aren’t going to leave it knowing they will be worse off without it than with it. Hat being said, we need to make sure people are making better decisions with schooling and both the government and banks need to go, you know what, we aren’t going to do loans for crap degrees and the DoE needs to go, you know what, we are going to treat degrees as certifications and training instead of all this padded nonsense.
Greedy in what context?
If a business is greedy; they get out-competed and go out of business. The entire concept of greed in business is a fallacy. Only with a government intervention is such greed actually possible.
It’s common sense. In order to cut Fed must increase money supply. That spikes inflation. Bond holders then require higher yield on long term bonds which will cause long term rates to go up, while the fed is dropping short term rates. The fed obviously knows economics and knows this. But, their purpose is to save a dying economy at the expense of higher long term rates, until the collapse happens - in other words the rate cuts are designed to “kick the can down the road” at the expense of a worse collapse. The final conclusion can only be that this is a controlled collapse, engineered as the great economic reset with the participants being the fed, well for me tho Bitcoin is the ultimate defence against a tyrannical government.r.....I've been engaged in active trading and managed to grow a nest egg of around 2.3Bitcoin to a decent 24Bitcoin....I'm especially grateful to Linda Wilburn, whose deep expertise and traditional trading acumen have been invaluable in this challenging, ever-evolving financial landscape.
She's often interacts on Telegrams, using the user-name.
@Lindawilburn
In a field as rapidly evolving as cryptocurrency, staying updated is crucial. Linda’s continual research and adaptation to the latest market changes have been instrumental in helping me make informed decisions.
Always backup your trading with a good strategy.
Nice, I was just hodling before I found Wilburn. In my opinion she is the very best out there.
What Bret Weinsitein says. 100%.
03:15 What do you 100% agree with here? What's his story?
@@roundtwo3321
100% means all of it. You tell me what his story is?
Not really.
@@wawabbit
Which bits?
The biggest evil are the landlords. The biggest issue is the cost of a home.
okay but who owns the land?
Totally commie thing to say. I hope you're referring to Blackrock not the mom and pop type who saved for a second home to invest.
These people who rent can't afford a mortgage so be careful who you hate
Shut up
How are landlords evil?
No blame for the Federal Reserve in your comment??
Some see UBI as a social inheritance where people have participated in nation-building. Their work has brought us to modern times when robots will be doing the job. People have also been used as cannon fodder to settle disputes between nations. Now we have arrived at this point together, and it is time to receive our inheritance for the amazing job our ancestors have done in shaping this planet. In my opinion, a good reason we deserve UBI is the question we should be asking when companies start selling data. Well, let's see, it began in the 1980s, according to Google. The year is 2024, so I wonder how much has been sold and yet we don't get a paycheck. So, in a way, since the 1980s up until now, it's UBI money that we deserve.
Also, in the video where Dr Bret Weinstein is saying punishes those who contribute and rewards those that don't well let's see some workers especially CEOS don't do anything at jobs to contribute and they get paid but regardless there are going to be people who don't contribute even at jobs.
No idea! There will always be sellers that are rich or aspiring. Without a UBI there is noone to sell to.
UBI will come from taxes of production. More production more tax.
If land tax is involved it will work even better. See Phillip J Anderson, Fred Harrison, Catherine Cashmore.
Fantastic video! I have incurred so much losses trading on my own.... I trade well on demo but I think the real market is manipulated.... Can anyone help me out or at least tell me what I'm doing wrong??
Same here, my portfolio has been going down the drain while I try trading,I just don't know what I do wrong..
Investing with an expert is the best strategy for beginners and busy investors, as most failures and losses in investment usually happen when you invest without proper guidance. I'm speaking from experience.
I think l'm blessed if not I wouldn't have met someone who is as spectacular as expert mrs Fenella..
Highly recommended 🙌
Wow, I'm surprised to see Fenella mentioned here as well. I didn't know she had been kind to so many people
I'm also a huge beneficiary of her..
I thought myself and my family were
the only ones enjoying Fenella
trade benefits
I will be eternally grateful to you, you have changed my entire life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear how you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small investment, thank you Adalyn Christopher.
Wow. I was a little surprised to see her mentioned here too. I had no idea she was so kind to so many people. It's amazing. I'm on my 5th transaction with her and she is the best.
She is a really good investment advisor. I had the opportunity to attend her seminars several times. That was the beginning of my cryptocurrency investments.
She is mostly interact on tele gram with the user name written below
@EXPERTADALYN💯... that's it
Do you also deal with Adalyn Christopher? Wow, this woman is a blessing to me and my family.