/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17977363
No, it will only hurt the economy. An economy is the goods and services produced. UBI would take money away from those most likely and able to invest money into creating more goods and services and give it to idiots who are more likely to squander it.

The original idea - Negative Income tax, was a far better idea than UBI. It was meant as a politically viable improvement to the welfare system. UBI was a downgrade, and Andrew Yang's system was even more retarded. Literally wouldn't have replaced any of the current welfare and just added more on top. What shitbrain.

>>17977417
Only if they print a shitload of money to fund it.

>>15827341
Perpetual growth is what is happening. The problem is the way they measure it. We keep getting growth through new technology and capital investment.

They are expecting growth in the form of certain numbers like GDP and have based it on expanding population sizes to fund the government which acts like a giant ponzi scheme. This is the problem. We need to stop spending money that we don't have. Need to slash all government programs, pay off the debt and leave the government small. No need for Medicare or Medicaid ponzi schemes. No need the for Social Security ponzi scheme. No need for the government pension ponzi scheme.

No need for our military to be the size it is. We are literally at nearly 0 military risk. Think about it, we are bordered by Canada and Mexico. All we need is a tiny military to defend that, maybe some of our shipments, and some sort of way to defend against ballistic/hypersonic/sub launched missiles which we really don't have anyways. Islands can go fuck themselves.