Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Finance, the economy & Economics Guaranteed minimum income

I am pretty much in agreement with you except that I might still be in favor of providing "those who are too lazy to work" with enough to offset starvation and I would provide them with the medical care that they need. Everything else, they would have to earn.
My reasoning for providing them with enough to get food and shelter is simple, we're already doing that for a ridiculously high number of prisoner right now, most of whom are in for very minor drug offenses.
Legalize the pot, free the pot prisoners, transfer the funds used to feed and house those prisoners to the lazy bums instead.

Poverty needs to be an adverse experience for the able bodied folks who can work but it need not be a death sentence.

All that having been said, with that formula applied I accept the fact that there would STILL remain a certain low percentage of people who STILL would choose not to work, it's just how they are. They're dropouts, bums, hobos, and every society has had them since time began.

Now, IF those unwilling to work show up at a center and demonstrate that they are now EAGER to work, and they demonstrate an ability to benefit from training and they show that they will indeed actively search for work, I say let them have those subsidized cell phones, let them have whatever it is they need in the way of clothing and personal items to help them get a start. I do want the welcome to the world of work to be something which attracts more people. I want there to be a carrot.

'
My point exactly.

Yes!

The longest journey starts with the first step...
The CESJ page has some interesting stories about their connections with some of the Arab Spring and emerging African Nations. Actually engaging in planting seeds of the program.

The time may not have come, but in the turmoil of international financial crises, many discouraged leaders are casting about for possible alternatives.

After a revolution comes a period of uncertainty. No better time to "level the playing field".

Not in this decade, perhaps, but the seeds are being planted. Everyone I know that has taken the time to understand capital homesteading, has come away without finding major faults in the paradigm.

Not so much interest in the chat rooms.

Never fear comrades! The world need not end because the makers of Hostess Twinkies has gone bankrupt.
You can make them at home!
Twinkies Recipe From King Arthur Flour

I have eleven coming for brunch on Sunday, this looks simple enough....

Its,
I think that what we are working towards in my community is, in principle, striving for the same effects as capital homesteading. I think it is essentially similar to stakeholder capitalism.

I'm a nuts and bolts guy - you want a root grapple for your skidsteer? Gimme a pile of steel, some parts, a torch, and a welder and I'll make you one. If I have to go to 20 meetings and hammer out a global mission statement, form a coalition, fundraise, organize a committee to "support, promote, and encourage" the building of a root grapple, count me out.

What I am not seeing in the links, or in searches for capital homesteading, is the actual plan for implementing it.

Am I missing something?

Maybe a little more complex...

Capital Homestead

The Main CESJ Page

The CESJ Website is huge, and may be a bit daunting when you first get there.

Implementation comes from a total commitment on the part of government to borrow trillions... admittedly not likely to happen here... at least not yet.

After the Arab Spring uprisings, CESJ members were consulted as plans for the states were being considered. We'll have to see what happens in Greece and Portugal... it's possible that after default, that some parts of the model could be instituted.

Without going into the details, Capital Homesteading could be considered as a form of bootstrap recovery from bankruptcy.
I don't like to categorize it that way, since it's much more complicated, and there doesn't need to be a bankruptcy.

The best part of CH is that:
#1-It will not affect the wealthy, which would be the kiss of death.

#2-The initial debt is nationwide... which eliminates individual risk.

It doesn't stir any interest here, probably because it is different and requires some investment of time to understand,
but I think it has gone beyond being the stuff of dreamers, and has considerable support among serious financial professionals.

Not ready for prime time... yet.

(1) So, one of primary concepts within this system appears to be a flat tax. A flat tax falls heaviest on those who make the least. The rich will still afford diamond studded credit cards. How is this different?
(2) How do we "eliminate deficits" by simplifying taxes. Deficits occur because we spend too much, or we take in too little in taxes to pay for necessary government services. This needs to be explained because in public political speech, "Simplifying taxes" is a euphemism used by republicans for reducing taxes. Reducing taxes reduces money available for the government to pay for those services and results in greater deficits as were Bush's Tax Cuts (which became Obama's tax cuts) and really amounted to borrowing more money in order to hand out taxcuts as bribes to voters.
(3) Social Security is a Safety Net for the poor as are Medicaid, Medicare,foodstamps, and other welfare programs. These already exist. How are these replaced, other than giving people a tax credit which the working poor would never be able to cash because they don't make enough money anyway.