Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Even though I acknowledge it's flaws, at the end of the day I will always be pro-capitalism. No it's not a perfect system by any means but I believe it's the best one we have. Human beings are imperfect by nature so any system put in place by humans is going to have flaws.

If you were emperor of the universe, what would be your ideal economic system and how would you go about implementing it? Would you allow for individual wealth or would you prefer a system where everyone had equal means no matter what?

Civil discussion please.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
I’m not going to go into my system too much, since it’s tied into a political and societal structure and would require a rather lengthy essay. I’ll just list the main points.
  • I’m okay with capitalism. Deregulation has its place sometimes, but regulation has its place too.
  • There’s a difference between Scandinavian socialism (proportion representational, multi party democracy, socially libertarian, mixed economy) and Soviet socialism (authoritarian, single party politburo, secret police, communism). I overwhelmingly prefer the former, although both types of socialism allow for (in American terms) medicare for all, free college and a general safety net, even if the state is failing.
  • Even though I lean towards socialism, I am not one of those "you didn’t build that" types. Entrepreneurism, free enterprise and being inventive is still valued, as is personal property. And there’s nothing wrong with a safety net being in existence if you fail.
  • Square Deals, New Deals, and Green New Deals are acceptable to fix the infrastructure of the state.
  • Universal Basic Income, yes. It’s to help fix poverty, homelessness and the perpetually unemployed and underemployed, as well as makes legislation like the DMCA unnecessary, as artists will be compensated for their work.
  • Illegal immigration, no. Lower classes need a chance at upwards economic mobility, and it isn’t fair to those that migrated legally either.
  • Nothing wrong with being a millionaire or a billionaire. But excesses must be reigned in from time to time to prevent economic inequality.
  • Bad businesses should be allowed to fail instead of being bailed out. Bail out cities and people instead.
  • Fair trade over free trade.
  • Green economy w/ conservation efforts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
  • Universal Basic Income, yes. It’s to help fix poverty, homelessness and the perpetually unemployed and underemployed, as well as makes legislation like the DMCA unnecessary, as artists will be compensated for their work
Thank you for adding to the discussion. I appreciate your input and I don't disagree with everything you had to say.

But... I think UBI is a terrible idea for a few reasons:


1. We're all paying for it. Nothing is gained, it's just redistribution of money.

2. It won't help the people it's intended the help because the market will just adapt and the price of goods and services will rise in accordance. Just adds to inflation.

3. From my observation, I don't think money can solve poverty and homelessness. It can help alleviate someone's situation temporarily but if someone is either addicted to drugs, addicted to alcohol, mentally incapable... or just a plain fuck up... eventually the actions that led them there will lead them right back. If you gave some crackhead in the street $1000 right now he's not going to turn his life around, he's probably going to buy crack with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
Thank you for adding to the discussion. I appreciate your input and I don't disagree with everything you had to say.

But... I think UBI is a terrible idea for a few reasons:


1. We're all paying for it. Nothing is gained, it's just redistribution of money.

2. It won't help the people it's intended the help because the market will just adapt and the price of goods and services will rise in accordance. Just adds to inflation.

3. From my observation, I don't think money can solve poverty and homelessness. It can help alleviate someone's situation temporarily but if someone is either addicted to drugs, addicted to alcohol, mentally incapable... or just a plain fuck up... eventually the actions that led them there will lead them right back. If you gave some crackhead in the street $1000 right now he's not going to turn his life around, he's probably going to buy crack with it.
1. You have to look at it as something community based, instead of how it effects the individual. A community would surely understand it is in their interest that there is an increase in attendance in school, children complete high school, children have less emotion and behavioural problems, children have a better relationship with their family, reduces hospitalizations in relations to mental health, and crime is reduced.

2. Numerous pilot studies, from the 1960s to today, have shown that UBI is used to help solve peoples immediate problem (bills, groceries, debt, etc) and to free up time for social goods like helping out in the community. It’s not meant to be used on luxury goods or drugs and alcohol.

3.Sometimes all that is needed is a temporary alleviation of problems. It would be giving them a leg up to do something about their situation.

And Insites can help with drug addiction. There’s one in Vancouver, and it works quite well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
1. You have to look at it as something community based, instead of how it effects the individual. A community would surely understand it is in their interest that there is an increase in attendance in school, children complete high school, children have less emotion and behavioural problems, children have a better relationship with their family, reduces hospitalizations in relations to mental health, and crime is reduced.

2. Numerous pilot studies, from the 1960s to today, have shown that UBI is used to help solve peoples immediate problem (bills, groceries, debt, etc) and to free up time for social goods like helping out in the community. It’s not meant to be used on luxury goods or drugs and alcohol.

3.Sometimes all that is needed is a temporary alleviation of problems. It would be giving them a leg up to do something about their situation.

And Insites can help with drug addiction. There’s one in Vancouver, and it works quite well.
1. How does giving everyone free money solve any of these problems? They have nothing to do with income. Those are all family related issues.

2. Again you're ignoring that once everyone is steadily receiving a monthly check from the government, the price of goods and services will increase in response. Meaning no one will have gained any ground. And yes if you give a drug addict a check, they are going to spend it on drugs.

3. No that is called a band aid. It doesn't address the root cause of those issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
1. It makes life steadier. That includes family life.

2. And you’re ignoring that an individual will have more free time to help out others in their community that need help.

3. Sometimes, the root of a person’s issue is simply needing more money for day-to-day living.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
1. It makes life steadier. That includes family life.

2. And you’re ignoring that an individual will have more free time to help out others in their community that need help.

3. Sometimes, the root of a person’s issue is simply needing more money for day-to-day living.
Throwing money at the problem doesn't any of those things.

"We all fish better teach ya folk, give him money to eat the next week he's broke.." - Hov

What you are proposing is a temporary band-aid that will not solve any of the root issues that cause those problems in the first place.

Anyone who thinks money will solve their unhappiness is lying to themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
I'd rather have a system where corporations aren't treated like people.
Complete agreement here.

Throwing money at the problem doesn't any of those things.

"We all fish better teach ya folk, give him money to eat the next week he's broke.." - Hov

What you are proposing is a temporary band-aid that will not solve any of the root issues that cause those problems in the first place.

Anyone who thinks money will solve their unhappiness is lying to themselves.
I never said I wouldn’t teach them how to fish; that’s all tied into my political and societal structure, since that’s dealing with educational reform. But UBI is just an extra safety net for emergencies and things of that nature. It makes life less stressful for those that need it most. It’s not supposed to be a permanent fix for their problems and shouldn’t be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Complete agreement here.



I never said I wouldn’t teach them how to fish; that’s all tied into my political and societal structure, since that’s dealing with educational reform. But UBI is just an extra safety net for emergencies and things of that nature. It makes life less stressful for those that need it most. It’s not supposed to be a permanent fix for their problems and shouldn’t be.
This theory of yours completely goes against the law of supply and demand though. That's just not how our economy works.

In order to fund UBI you would need to raise everyone's taxes. And again if people at the bottom are given more money to spend, the price of everything else will inevitably rise in accordance. The people you think you are helping are not gaining any ground whatsoever and worse off we inflate our own currency.

What do you say to this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
This theory of yours completely goes against the law of supply and demand though. That's just not how our economy works.

In order to fund UBI you would need to raise everyone's taxes. And again if people at the bottom are given more money to spend, the price of everything else will inevitably rise in accordance. The people you think you are helping are not gaining any ground whatsoever and worse off we inflate our own currency.

What do you say to this?
So? Higher taxes in exchange for a high quality of service that benefits everyone, so that no one will ever need to work more than one job to make ends meet.

Also, it’s about meeting their basic needs. After that, they are still responsible for upwards mobility in terms of going from lower class to middle class or higher. That’s not just in terms of employment, but education as well (which itself will be free), and taking advantage of all opportunities that present themselves.

Also, as long as there is inflation, prices will always go up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,387 Posts
Throwing money at the problem doesn't any of those things.

"We all fish better teach ya folk, give him money to eat the next week he's broke.." - Hov

What you are proposing is a temporary band-aid that will not solve any of the root issues that cause those problems in the first place.

Anyone who thinks money will solve their unhappiness is lying to themselves.
Jay Z is a hack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #13 (Edited)
So? Higher taxes in exchange for a high quality of service that benefits everyone, so that no one will ever need to work more than one job to make ends meet.

Also, it’s about meeting their basic needs. After that, they are still responsible for upwards mobility in terms of going from lower class to middle class or higher. That’s not just in terms of employment, but education as well (which itself will be free), and taking advantage of all opportunities that present themselves.

Also, as long as there is inflation, prices will always go up.
But nobody can define 'basic needs' for anyone else. By that logic if there is access to food, water and shelter then everyone's basic needs have already been met.

Do you think everyone is owed their own house and their own car? What exactly is included in the 'basic needs' package?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
But nobody can define 'basic needs' for anyone else. By that logic if there is access to food, water and shelter then everyone's basic needs have already been met.

Do you think everyone is owed their own house and their own car? What exactly is included in the 'basic needs' package?
That arguably goes into whether or not there should a Bill of Rights outlining basic needs. But this is not a political philosophy discussion.

I would think that a basic outline for basic needs would be: food, water, shelter & utilities (which would include internet access by today’s standard, since its access to information to both educational opportunities and job opportunities).

And since UBI would be going to these needs, the money that is earned can go towards other important things like paying bills and investing in a fledging small business. Within the US system, it would also be useful for health emergencies. I read that some Americans cannot afford a $400 emergency. A monthly UBI of $1000, for example, would help alleviate that.

UBI is just welfare-for-all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
That arguably goes into whether or not there should a Bill of Rights outlining basic needs. But this is not a political philosophy discussion.

I would think that a basic outline for basic needs would be: food, water, shelter & utilities (which would include internet access by today’s standard, since its access to information to both educational opportunities and job opportunities).

And since UBI would be going to these needs, the money that is earned can go towards other important things like paying bills and investing in a fledging small business. Within the US system, it would also be useful for health emergencies. I read that some Americans cannot afford a $400 emergency. A monthly UBI of $1000, for example, would help alleviate that.

UBI is just welfare-for-all.
Okay so how much food does everyone get? Someone who's 140 lbs obviously doesn't consume as much food as someone's who's 350 lbs. Should equal allotments be set aside for both of them? What is your solution when someone goes over their allotment?

Also what kind of food do we need to provide for everybody? Is it steak and a lobster for all or is it ramen noodles? Is everyone entitled to whatever kind of food they want?

And lastly... how big a shelter must everyone have? Does everyone get their own house? Their own apartment? Their own room? How do you decide?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
Okay so how much food does everyone get? Someone who's 140 lbs obviously doesn't consume as much food as someone's who's 350 lbs. Should equal allotments be set aside for both of them? What is your solution when someone goes over their allotment?

Also what kind of food do we need to provide for everybody? Is it steak and a lobster for all or is it ramen noodles? Is everyone entitled to whatever kind of food they want?

And lastly... how big a shelter must everyone have? Does everyone get their own house? Their own apartment? Their own room? How do you decide?
You are confused.

Soviet socialism aka communism, is where food tends to get rationed, and the government owns and produces everything: businesses, the land, utilities, food, clean water, everything. Private ownership isn’t allowed.

Scandinavian socialism aka social democracy, is where food and shelter isn’t rationed and you can technically buy whatever you want without limit still, since a mixed economy combines both capitalism and socialism; socialism mainly being used for control of resources and public utilities and capitalism is regulated to prevent unfair practices. It’s common in basically the rest of the Western world, and private ownership is still allowed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
You are confused.

Soviet socialism aka communism, is where food tends to get rationed, and the government owns and produces everything: businesses, the land, utilities, food, clean water, everything. Private ownership isn’t allowed.

Scandinavian socialism aka social democracy, is where food and shelter isn’t rationed and you can technically buy whatever you want without limit still, since a mixed economy combines both capitalism and socialism; socialism mainly being used for control of resources and public utilities and capitalism is regulated to prevent unfair practices. It’s common in basically the rest of the Western world, and private ownership is still allowed.
Right but what I'm trying to say is... while I think this sounds great in theory, it could never actually bring about the results you intend. I am okay with having public resources, but once you incorporate some element of UBI I believe that is going too far.

Giving everyone free money sounds great... if money grew on trees.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
Right but what I'm trying to say is... while I think this sounds great in theory, it could never actually bring about the results you intend. I am okay with having public resources, but once you incorporate some element of UBI I believe that is going too far.

Giving everyone free money sounds great... if money grew on trees.
Even as a temporary measure?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Even as a temporary measure?
In this time of crisis? In the name of restoring the economy and life as we know it back to the way it was? Sure, absolutely. There will be inflation for sure and we'll experience a bit of a recession but it beats the alternative.

I just don't want it becoming a permanent or even long term measure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
This idea was championed by free market economist and capitalist Milton Friedman. He just called it a Negative Income Tax instead.

Capitalism needs the lower classes to afford necessities in order to work effectively. UBI allows this.
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top