The Neo-Liberals ...

[CT Phipps]

The state government solution in my area is to allow the poor to kill themselves with opiates and meth.

 

[valcik]

But tell me, if you would be a block owner, why would you put your levelihood in jeopardy by demanding from people more than what they can pay?

What jeopardy? Haven't you argued before that people won't leave their jobs due to UBI system? Since somebody can afford to pay his rent now, after UBI he'd be perfectly fit to pay previous rent raised by value of his UBI granted bonus.

Also, this:

People renting aparments,housese etc. would receive it as well, why raise the rent by 1500 if you already get 1500.

.. is purely a mathematics. The apartment block owner with 30 flats would get his 1500 from UBI, but after raising the rent by 1500 he'd get 45000 on top of it. This is free market you two geniuses, not a conspiration.

edit:

The state government solution in my area is to allow the poor to kill themselves with opiates and meth.

Rich people ruin their lives the same way. UBI only means more money to spend on drugs for this kind of folks.

 

[Crni Vuk]

.. is purely a mathematics. The apartment block owner with 30 flats would get his 1500 from UBI, but after raising the rent by 1500 he'd get 45000 on top of it. This is free market you two geniuses, not a conspiration.

What keeps people from doing it already now? I mean charging people like 2 or 3 times of what they 'earn'. And if you found the answer to that, you will know why it won't happen with UBI either. Anyway, you must also think that people who rent apartments will just silently accept a raise as high like that.

You really have a very pecuilar view of land lords here. How comes? Has a landlord killed your pet or something?

Also here again:
And I would be curious to hear from you what kind of policy you would propose if UBI is not a viable idea for you. What should the government/society do in 20+ years with 40% unemployment?
This time in bolt. I will also increase the size gradutaly over time.

I mean we can all trash talk certain concepts, that's all nice and dandy, but the intention of this topic was also task for what neo-cons and neo-liberals propose. So, what 'could' be done in the future? Are there concepts? Or ideas?

Rich people ruin their lives the same way. UBI only means more money to spend on drugs for this kind of folks.

They tested this with poor by simply giving them money. It was mostly false as almost none of them spended all his money on 'drugs' and 'booze', in fact most people used the money to improve their lives, getting better education, food, medications etc.

The results from the study are encouraging, says Johannes Haushofer, an economist at MIT's Poverty Action Lab who was one of the study's co-authors.

"We don't see people spending money on alcohol and tobacco," he says. "Instead we see them investing in their kids' education, we see them investing in health care. They buy more and better food."

People used the money to buy cows and start businesses. Their kids went hungry less often.
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2...ppens-when-you-just-give-money-to-poor-people
​

They also tested it in India.

Since the debate over cash has become so polarised, SEWA and Unicef deliberately chose not to substitute a government service like PDS with cash, and then measure the impact of cash. "The study does not address the issue of whether this should mean a move away from the PDS," Ahluwalia said after the findings had been presented. "What this shows is that with slightly higher incomes, households spend on important things like schooling and health, and not alcohol," rural development minister Jairam Ramesh agreed.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-on-schooling-health/articleshow/20441455.cms​

Well, who would have thought, poor people spend money ... on improving their situation.

Just as bonus, since we mentioned drug abbuse and poor people, you could as well ask why they do it:


People aren't poor because they take drugs, for the most part they take drugs because they are poor.

 

[CT Phipps]

Rich people ruin their lives the same way. UBI only means more money to spend on drugs for this kind of folks.

As I explained to my wife when a prominent local politician was found guilty of using crack with a hooker, I was like, "This is appalling. You're rich, man. Buy COCAINE. Don't use crack. Show some class."

 

[Hassknecht]

What keeps people from doing it already now? I mean charging people like 2 or 3 times of what they 'earn'.

They wouldn't charge them two or three times of what they earn. They would charge the appropriate amount of what they earn. If the overall income suddenly rises by a thousand bucks, landlords can safely increase their rents accordingly to reach the same income bracket.

As I explained to my wife when a prominent local politician was found guilty of using crack with a hooker, I was like, "This is appalling. You're rich, man. Buy COCAINE. Don't use crack. Show some class."

Crack might be used as a direct payment for the hookers, maybe?

 

[valcik]

What keeps people from doing it already now?

Nothing, it actually happens right now. You can't rent apartment in our capital city for a price lower than our minimal wage, and common rent for a house is ~30x minimal wage on average. Which means only couples can afford this, single person living from minimal wage has to ask government for social housing.

i.e. this can be solved only by non-profit housing owned by government and donated from state treasury, or by strict regulations mentioned by Sua before. No way around it.

They tested this with poor by simply giving them money. It was mostly false as almost none of them spended all his money on 'drugs' and 'booze' ..

Poor people =/= junkies. Guess what, there's a lot of families in Slovakia living under the poverty line and they are not junkies or drug abusers either. Sure, they'll spend all their surplus income on family stuff too.

Junkie throwing his life away willingly is something different, you can't turn him into model citizen just by a handful of cash.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Nothing, it actually happens right now. You can't rent apartment in our capital city for a price lower than our minimal wage, and common rent for a house is ~30x minimal wage on average.

So it's not an argument against UBI in my opinion, but simply a general issue that has to be tackled.

Also here again:
And I would be curious to hear from you what kind of policy you would propose if UBI is not a viable idea for you. What should the government/society do in 20+ years with 40% unemployment?
This time in bolt. I will also increase the size gradually over time.

Poor people =/= junkies. Guess what, there's a lot of families in Slovakia living under the poverty line and they are not junkies or drug abusers either. Sure, they'll spend all their surplus income on family stuff too.

Junkie throwing his life away willingly is something different, you can't turn him into model citizen just by a handful of cash.

Did you watch the video?

I posted it, because it has more to do with how you 'treat' either poor people or junkies, what ever if you 'criminalize' them or if you actually see it as something that is closer to a disease (in the case with junkies for example), many nations that had a serious drug problem, like Swiss changed their attitude on it, and they actually manged to tackle the problem by de-criminalizing drug abbusers and addicts and offering rehab programs that actually aim on improving their lives.

The point was anyway that tests indicate poor people rather spend aditional money on improving their lives instead of simply buying more drugs. Addiction and drug abbuse has often something to do with the conditions you're facing - hence, see the video from kurzgesagt. fix the conditions, and many people stop using drugs.

 

[valcik]

Also here again:
And I would be curious to hear from you what kind of policy you would propose if UBI is not a viable idea for you. What should the government/society do in 20+ years with 40% unemployment?
This time in bolt. I will also increase the size gradually over time.

Already answered couple of times, FFS. Look at this post by @DarkCorp at page 3, he summed it up nicely:
http://nma-fallout.com/threads/.211374/page-3#post-4227764
ed: add strict birth control too, he forgot this one

Did you watch the video?

Nope, I browse with JavaScript turned off, your video is lost on me. Provide brief transcript pl0x.

 

[BigGuyCIA]

Where is the 40% figure coming from for unemployment.

 

[valcik]

Doesn't matter, we do have regions with 40% unemployment rate already here in Slovakia and people are doing fine with their pre-industrial activities. Lots of traditional agriculture/craftsmanship and barter trade going on.

 

[CT Phipps]

Crack might be used as a direct payment for the hookers, maybe?

Then you need a better class of hooker!



Of course, the irony is I had to reuse that line as I originally did it in high school when the Mayor of Washington D.C. did the same thing.

Where is the 40% figure coming from for unemployment.

It's a speculation by "scientists" which deals with the fact a lot of manufacturing and industry jobs can now be roboticized and the fact it's happening now in China.

I also posted some examples of the fact taxi cabs, hotels, and even farming have experimental robotics facilities now being put into use. There's lots of working class jobs which machines can do a better job than regular people in, even in the sweatshop conditions we've seen used to justify moving them from the USA.

Doesn't matter, we do have regions with 40% unemployment rate already here in Slovakia and people are doing fine with their pre-industrial activities. Lots of traditional agriculture/craftsmanship and barter trade going on.

As much as I disagree with you about a lot, it's nice to see some perspective from Eastern Europe.

 

[valcik]

Thank you @CT Phipps
As a matter of fact, Slovakia is in central Europe actually, right in the heart of this rotten old world.

 

[Hassknecht]

Then you need a better class of hooker!

There was a similar case in Germany where a politician was caught with something that was allegedly crack. Apparently it's especially used in gay prostitute circles and gay sex orgies.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Maybe crack is simply a hell of a drug, did you ever thought about that?

 

[CT Phipps]

Thank you @CT Phipps
As a matter of fact, Slovakia is in central Europe actually, right in the heart of this rotten old world.

I am just a dumbass then.

 

[SuAside]

Except that there is absolutely zero basis for that statement, saying that UBI could lead to communism is simply a ridiculous statement.

You're telling me that a left leaning government which is handed near totalitarian power to control the economy could never conceivably end up being communist?

Considering how much money our governemnts spend on garbage and how much money the population spend on garbage, I would say no, no it really isn't.

I totally agree the government spends a whole lot of money unwisely. We need smaller & more focused governments. But your other comment? The population? By that, you mean the rich, I guess? Because if you fund UBI by taxing Joe Sixpack, you don't change anything.

So you tax the rich who spend "on garbage"? No, not really. The main problem is that the rich DO NOT spend their money on anything (proportionally), let alone garbage. If the money was in play, you'd have a healthy economy since it would be spend on goods and services. Now, the rich hoard the money, if you will.

Maybe a few people would have to finally pay their fair share to the society, like the rich and super rich, but hey I am not going to cry a river about that. If you had to pay 70% tax on 1 milion of earned euros, you would still have a fuck ton of money left for your live.

I always find it funny when people decide with self-righteous zeal what is someone else's "fair share".

Look at the elephant graph, this isn't some vodoo magic, it's down hard economic science. Global profits are growing, while the middle classes are shrinking.

It is, I never said it wasn't or that it wasn't a problem.

Remember again who Bill Gates is. But he is by far not the only one. The guy who co-founded Amazon is also saying that the clock is ticking for the rich and if they actually want to avoid people storming their houses at some point, they should wake up and do something about it. Growing inequality with automatition will be one of the big chalanges of OUR generation. 20-30 years is still in our life time you know.

I doubt it'll be the biggest issue for our generation. The aging western civilization and the fact we fail to procreate at a high enough rate (to sustain our growth) is the largest issue.
Automation is the next generation's big challenge, but obviously we should do what we can to prepare them for it.

Yeah, because they all will move from Florida to China or India. I can see it already now. Look at places that have the highest taxation, like Swiss or Sweden, all those 'poor' rich, and how desperately they try to flee those nations.

And their money is in Panama, the Caymans, Singapore,...

In many cases the government HAS this kind of power, at least in Germany, Sweden, Swiss, Netherlands, well most of the European nations that followa more social democratic approach.

Your government most certainly DOES NOT have that kind of power currently. Your government has the limited ability to regulate pricing of basic necessities and to set tax rates.
To attempt anything required for UBI, they would need to vote a whole new legal framework (spread over multiple legislative cycles).

Besides, almost ANY kind of law can be turned against the people. But I don't see how the UBI could be turned against the people, like you or me.

Then you are quite unimaginative.

You forget one very important point here. Everyone would receive the UBI. From land owners, to buisness owners and normal citiezens. People renting aparments,housese etc. would receive it as well, why raise the rent by 1500 if you already get 1500. Some prices would change, no doubts about that, but some goods would become more expensive, while others would become less expensive. Simple economcs as you say, supply and demand, raise the prices to much and demand drops, lower the prices and demand will grow.

1500 is peanuts to big business and big landlords.
You utterly fail to understand the laws of supply and demand, by the way. I don't know what more I can say to make you see that without price fixing and extensive regulation, your UBI would be utterly worthless to Joe Sixpack.

What they did in India was to give every poor person in a community 4 $ every month for some years - which is a lot for India - to see what would happen. The result was a growing education, improvement in health and quality of living. The test is in so far interesting, as UBI could be a way to combat poverty and improving the lives of millions of people. But, like I said, there has to be more and better testing.

You give a set of people more money and their situation improves? Who would've thought that!?!
It's blatantly obvious and I'm unsure what you think this proves. The problem is when you apply it en masse and in a closed self-funding system without outside input.

You keep saying we need more testing, but what you fail to tell me is HOW you would like to make this remotely viable? Unless you have a plan, you're just hoping to turn lead into gold by dipping it into various reagents and hoping that you'll eventually get it right by sheer luck.

At some point someone must had the idea to implement the economies and policies we have now. Like the pensions in Germany which have worked for the last 70 years since WW2. I would not dismiss everything just like that. There are some smart experts out there and they know what they are doing.

I'm not dismissing anything, I'm asking you to give concrete examples where it might work. All you've given me is "I like this idea, but can't explain why it'll work" & "some people are smart, they'll figure it out!".
Why can't I find ANY suggested implementation of UBI which actually details how it would be funded without resorting to price fixing and artificial inflation mitigation which requires a totalitarian control of the economy in question?

I want to believe in UBI, because I have no working alternative of my own. But nothing said in this thread has given a remotely plausible solution to the problem and nothing in this thread has removed my concerns.

Yes, economy is a highly complex field, and reality is often different than what we expect, but saying that 'all' laws do not work? That's a pretty bolt statement. I had also economy classes in my education, not on a universty level granted, but it wasn't that far from it.

You remember how in fysics class, you first learnt some pretty simple law that explains how to calculate friction? You do the math and the teacher gives you 10/10 for using the mathematical equation she gave you? Remember how an experiment always horribly failed when tested in reality because the mathematical equation failed to take into account things like air resistance etc?

That's 99% of the economic laws. It tells you how something should behave in a far less complex system. Or it tells you how things would be if people were rational (pro tip: we really aren't).

And I would be curious to hear from you what kind of policy you would propose if UBI is not a viable idea for you. What should the government/society do in 20+ years with 40% unemployment?

As said, I have no answer and that scares the shit out of me. Luckily for me, I believe it won't become a real problem for me until I've died (since the real issues will surface for the next generations and I'm employed in a job which is certain to remain in high demand for the rest of my lifetime).

But if you ask me now, based on what has been said and what is known now, to chose for UBI? I would fight it. There is no fiber in my body that believes it stands any chance of succeeding without the price being too high. I am not willing to pay the potential price of having to deal with a truly totalitarian government.

I would much rather double back upon what we know: downsize the government, simplify legislation, combat fraud, remove loopholes enable low taxation of enterprises. That will not be enough, as you well know, but I don't see any better alternatives as it stands now.

Well, you could look at it from a different angle.
Let us say someone is earning 1100 $ per month, and he's paying like 700 $ for his apartment. Now he receives the UBI. What could 'hypothetically' happen? Let us say he decides now to only work part time, or to quit his second job, this would cut his loan in half, but with 1000 $ UBI, that would still be 1550 $, his Landlord, who's also receiving 1000$ now decides to raise his rent by like 50% (for what ever reason), even with a rent of 1050 $ the rent payer would STILL have more money than before AND it is even possible that his boss would have to hire a second guy because he decided to work only part time. So in the short term it might even create jobs.

But WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM and HOW DO YOU PREVENT INFLATION?

"Take it from the rich and enterprises" may sound good, but you'll need to work out an actual economic model where that works.
"We'll just do price fixing and index everything" means you're fine with a totalitarian state, but I most certainly am not. I'd rather be poor with some level of self-determination than a slave to the state.

Besides, I am not sure how things work exactly in the US and other places, but in Germany we have something that is called a 'contract' and people usually write in their contract that a rent shouldn't be riased by more than 5 or 10% per year or something - simply to avoid this kind of hike in prices. AND on top of that we already have a rent index in many parts of Germany, and land owners that demand more than the rent index can get in serious trouble. People can't just double or even triple prices, at least here, beacuse we have unions and associations for pretty much every shit, and most of the time that's a good thing.

The rent index does not cover new contracts. Therefor your logic is flawed.

What do you think happens when the EU decides to house their parliament in Brussels? Well, some city districts become popular with eurocrats which are now forced to live at least part time in Belgium. These people are well off and able to pay more than the average person already in that city district. So what happens then? Housing prices rise as there is a raised demand by people with more capital. In some cases people are even incentivised to leave their current homes to make room for eurocrats.
What happens if you start asking too much? Well, these eurocrats start going to the next best district and the prices go down as the demand lowers.

That is simple supply and demand.

 

[CT Phipps]

Honestly, I think a UBI is less likely than just expanded wellfare anyway.

No need to give EVERYONE 3,000 dollars a month versus the people who actually need it.

Better we use the money to give universal healthcare and other expanded services for people who can't afford them.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Already answered couple of times, FFS. Look at this post by @DarkCorp at page 3, he summed it up nicely:
http://nma-fallout.com/threads/.211374/page-3#post-4227764
ed: add strict birth control too, he forgot this one


Nope, I browse with JavaScript turned off, your video is lost on me. Provide brief transcript pl0x.

Yes, but those are EXTREMLY generic.

For example, what is meant with 'reform education', that one has been thrown around for the last 30 years.
What kind of reform? Are we talking Alexander Humboldt, Pestalozzi, Waldorf-education or Montessori?

How is it going to prevent the loss of jobs exactly if collegue education should only count for STEM related fields? Might be something for the short-term as you open the job market to more potential applicants, but you have to also create those job oportunities somehow. And as far as I can tell there ARE already a lot of collegue graduate students that simply can't find a job and thus work. The Wall-Mart employe with an academic degree if you want so.

Can't say anything about

Spoiler: this

Socialism with American characteristics. Things like EMTALA are one of the big socialist wins that I root for, brought about by Reagan, one of the GOPs biggest heroes. I am a big believer of states rights and to allow each state to develop socialism along the lines of its voter base. In AZ for example, we have something called ACHCCS and it is a state/federal program that offers health insurance to those in need. The cost is split between the state and federal level so the drain is more balanced rather than relying heavily on penalties, much like OBOOBY care.

But, if the federal governments and states want more controll over them self, that's ok I guess.

4. The climate. if we are serious about climate change, then the FIRST thing we need to do is put a better face on green energy than idiots like Jill Stein. How has beating the public over the head with fire and brimstone rhetoric done for green energy? People know we need to change but beating Joe Plebe over the head with fear isn't going to help the issue. We need to make a better effort at selling green energy to the masses, and not associating green energy alternatives with tax hikes and government over-regulation is just the first step.

Absolutely.
But some here call 'Beating them over the head with fear' is simply called science and reality. Stating facts, is sometimes ... frightneing, but well it's still what scientists say. Half of the population is currently living at the coasts, saying that those people will have to leave those areas, once the ocean levels rise due to climate change if we don't do something NOW, isn't 'fear mongering', it's simply stating a fact.

Fox News at it's finest.

What we're dealing with right regarding climate change can be only described as a mass phenomena of cognitive disonance - particularly by politicans and the elites.

Programs to incentivize companies to play a bigger part in charitable/social programs. Imagine it as a very small form of the corporate republic.

And how should that be achieved? Sounds to me an awfull lot like the 'privatisation' of social programms.

Most of those points, are really rather vague to say the least.

You're telling me that a left leaning government which is handed near totalitarian power to control the economy could never conceivably end up being communist?

Only if you can agree that a right wing leaning government - like as we have now in the US - which is handed near totalitarian power to controll the economic could conceivably end up beeing fascist?

Saying that UBI could 'lead' to a communist regime, isn't less ridiculous than saying that Trump could become the next Hitler.

That's all I am saying. I mean we can continue the discussion on this level ... but I would rather not want to, as I would rather want to talk about things that are actually likely, like millions of people loosing their jobs in the next 20 years or so.

So you tax the rich who spend "on garbage"? No, not really. The main problem is that the rich DO NOT spend their money on anything (proportionally), let alone garbage. If the money was in play, you'd have a healthy economy since it would be spend on goods and services. Now, the rich hoard the money, if you will.

Dude, it's tiresome.

We don't need a 'smaller' governments, we need more efficient governements with less lobyists and lawyers.

Look at the elphant graph, listen to some economics like Mark Blyth what they have to say about it, who also predicted Brexit by the way.
The rich and wealthy have to pay their fair share in to our societies, with yes taxes, and they simply don't do it right now. The only way to get them do it, is by laws. Not to mention all the companies that avoid paying taxes trough legal loop holes, which should have been fixed like already yesterday.

And this is not some hypothesis, the growing inequality is a cold hard fact at this point. A small population (world wide) is gaining more and more wealth, while the middle class is shrinking.

I always find it funny when people decide with self-righteous zeal what is someone else's "fair share".

We're talking about the rich and large corporations here, that have a habit of well, fucking people - like Nestle. I might not know what is 'fair share' for the average joe, yes, but a company like Star Bucks or Nestle fucking with people? That's pretty clear. Same with the rich which experience a historical low in taxation - not just in the US mind you.

I doubt it'll be the biggest issue for our generation. The aging western civilization and the fact we fail to procreate at a high enough rate (to sustain our growth) is the largest issue.
Automation is the next generation's big challenge, but obviously we should do what we can to prepare them for it.

The current data suggests otherwise though, that automation and climate change will hit us much sooner than the effects of overpopulation.
Automation is already happening and with huge effects, it will change a lot of jobs in the next 10-20 years, and even high skilled jobs in the next 30-40 years.
Overpopulation won't become a huge factor before the next 30 years - if ever see the video from Kurzgesagt.
Climate change will have a much higher effect in the next 50-70 years as half of the worlds population is currently living at the coasts.

And their money is in Panama, the Caymans, Singapore,...

While they're living in Germany, France, the US ... prisons and laws are there for a reason. Com on, don't play this game. Don't insult both our intelligence. You know laws to change that could be made like tomorrow. If the US and Europe would work together on this, do you think a nation like Panama or Singapore wouldn't move along at some point?

Your government most certainly DOES NOT have that kind of power currently. Your government has the limited ability to regulate pricing of basic necessities and to set tax rates.
To attempt anything required for UBI, they would need to vote a whole new legal framework (spread over multiple legislative cycles).

Probably yes, but if more and more people want it, it will happen and both politicans and experts will find ways to make it happen.

Then you are quite unimaginative.

Or, simply realistic.

1500 is peanuts to big business and big landlords.
You utterly fail to understand the laws of supply and demand, by the way. I don't know what more I can say to make you see that without price fixing and extensive regulation, your UBI would be utterly worthless to Joe Sixpack.

Yes, I fail to understand why someone should charge more from his costumers than what they can pay.
Isn't that also supply and demand? That's what they thought ME in school at least. Lower prices, increase demands.
By the way, there are also many things the government can do (and already does, at least for Germany) to support renters, like social/subsidized housing.

You keep saying we need more testing, but what you fail to tell me is HOW you would like to make this remotely viable? Unless you have a plan, you're just hoping to turn lead into gold by dipping it into various reagents and hoping that you'll eventually get it right by sheer luck.

10 000 people, over 5 years, 1 500 $ per month. That should yield enough viable data.
That's not me saying it by the way but experts.

That's 99% of the economic laws. It tells you how something should behave in a far less complex system. Or it tells you how things would be if people were rational (pro tip: we really aren't).

So why talk about anything at all, if everything is doomed to fail anyway ...

As said, I have no answer and that scares the shit out of me. Luckily for me, I believe it won't become a real problem for me until I've died (since the real issues will surface for the next generations and I'm employed in a job which is certain to remain in high demand for the rest of my lifetime).

Nice. A very cynical outlook on things. That's ok I guess.
But what if it does hit you? Or if things turn out to be even worse than the current predictions? Or if things happen faster than predicted? That's also a possibility.

But WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM and HOW DO YOU PREVENT INFLATION?

"Take it from the rich and enterprises" may sound good, but you'll need to work out an actual economic model where that works.
"We'll just do price fixing and index everything" means you're fine with a totalitarian state, but I most certainly am not. I'd rather be poor with some level of self-determination than a slave to the state.

There are, as far as I know currently 110 different suggestions on how to finance UBI. I am not going trough all of those studies now (takes almost 60-90 min. just to read one and even more time to understand it).
I am sure that there is one among them that might even appeal to you.

The rent index does not cover new contracts. Therefor your logic is flawed.

Germany has this already, and for the most part it works - with a few exceptions like Munich.

That is simple supply and demand.

A lot of it already happens now, it is a general problem and not necessarily tied to UBI. We have to deal with this what ever if we get UBI or not.

 

[DarkCorp]

There is a lot and I will answer most of it in a later post.

A quick thing though is:

AGAIN, like you said Crni, the facts are out there about climate change. The fear has already been mongered and people told the world is going to end. HOW MUCH HAS CHANGED ATM?? How much has all those FACTS and FEAR done to make our governments move FASTER with green energy??

This is what I am saying. You can scream, get on your moral high horse, spread fear, whatever. It is not going to motivate JOE PLEBE. If you want Joe Plebe, the majority of the nation, to get onboard, then you need to speak on terms THEY understand.

That means making a really good SALES PITCH for green initiatives. That ALSO means not associating said green initiative with tax hikes, power outages, energy prices rising sharply, Jill Stein.

SERIOUSLY, the left just keeps screaming CHANGE CHANGE and you better fucking change THE WAY I WANT YOU TO. Otherwise, go fuck yourselves.

@valcik

I already mentoned birth control but you can't say birth control without triggering lefties. That's why I speak of EDUCATION and how telling people having too many kids is a stupid fucking idea.

 

[CT Phipps]

SERIOUSLY, the left just keeps screaming CHANGE CHANGE and you better fucking change THE WAY I WANT YOU TO. Otherwise, go fuck yourselves.

@DarkCorp

It's the Golden Mean Fallacy at work. The Right, particularly in America but also abroad, has been peddling a softballed bullshit version of the truth which undermines everything and saying "it's not a problem" or "it's actually a benefit." It results in the situation like West Virginia is currently facing where the economy is utterly dependent on coal and no one wants it anymore because it's a useless product which is in dire need of updating. Updating which could have been done in the EIGHTIES without pain but has been allowed to fester for three decades until it will be an enormous infrastructural nightmare to deal with.

The Left admittedly does the same thing with SOME of its issues. For a non-American example, Venezuela is currently in the process of disintegrating due to the oil price falling after decades of the Right hoarding all their oil and then the Left applying large scale social programs (good) which depended on 95% of all their wealth coming from oil versus diversifying (bad).

Basically, people keep saying the problem aren't bad while others say they're bad while people assume the truth is in the middle when it's NOT.

The problem is there and it needs to be dealt with so people saying. "Stop being so loud about it" is bullshit.