✪ ✪ ✪ Counter-Narrative Thread - Truth and Better Ideas - Deprogramming the Left ✪ ✪ ✪

[HiDesertELR]

So... let's start a counter-narrative and resource heavy thread here, talking points to use against our opposition, similar to the "election stream" thread, but NOT the Q fantasy bombshell, boom stuff that gets labeled as conspiracy theory and handily dismissed and provides laughing stock for the opposition. No propaganda (easier said than done) or inflammatory rhetoric right-wing opinion pieces - just facts and conservative principles that have been proven out by example and history.

Think "A De-Programming of the Left Guide" for conservatives.

I'd like to see a similar repository, but using examples from history, real-world events, sound economic theories and practices that disprove what the left wants, constitutional tenets and their ramifications in a modern age, and how that precious document is being trampled on a daily basis by people that are only empowered to voice their nonsense because of that piece of paper and what the founding fathers envisioned as a shining city on the hill and the importance of our individual liberties. We should archive the hypocrisy and double-standards that we've all seen being spouted by the MSM, our elected politicians, and social media influencers and use it against them, repeatedly. They tell lies enough that low-information people start to believe them - we should repeat truth in the same manner, unrelentingly. Sure, it'll drive the zealots bat-shit crazy, but it could make a dent in the "just here for the free-cake" people and help turn the tide.

We're in a different kind of war now - information and intelligence. If we can amass a good one-stop resource of undeniable truth and facts, verifiable and actionable intelligence that we can use to counter their message, it'll enable us to fight much more effectively and decisively, IMHO. I can't club my neighbors over the head with subjective opinions, but I can give them facts, examples from history, constitutional premises and how they apply to 2021 and beyond, all while trying NOT to club them over the head because they're not acting like critical independent thinkers (which is a good question to ask them beforehand - do you consider yourself a critical independent thinker? Nobody will say "no, I'm a MSM sheeple group-think dumbass")

If this needs to be moved to the supporters / private section @lowlight please do so. I emptied my payment source in the PX, and will send funds as soon as I get them - this place has been the most valuable resource for our hobby than any other on the web, bar none. I came here to learn about fundamentals, and have come away with knowledge of other topics that I never intended.

So, calling all the scholars, historians, and academics of the 'Hide, you know who you are...

Post links to credible sources (even better if they're ones the left will quote), statistics, legal precedents, history lessons, resources, videos, lectures, etc.

11 rules for debating a Leftist from Ben Shapiro | Blaze Media

Tricks for debating family, friends and foes.

www.theblaze.com

Get your free Pocket Constitution

lp.hillsdale.edu

https://thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/The-Complete-Federalist-Papers.pdf

Send this to your contacts that don't have a freakin' clue about how our government is structured:

Branches of the U.S. government | USAGov

Learn about the 3 branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. Understand how each branch of U.S. government provides checks and balances.

www.usa.gov

US Government Budget Basics:

The federal budget process | USAGov

Learn about the federal government’s budget process, from the president’s budget plan to Congress’s work creating funding bills for the president to sign.

www.usa.gov

Links to contact your elected officials - local, state, federal:

Find and contact elected officials | USAGov

Use USAGov’s Contact Your Elected Officials tool to get contact information for your members of Congress, the president, and state and local officials.

www.usa.gov

Rules for displaying the American Flag:

The American flag and other national symbols | USAGov

When should you fly the U.S. flag at half-staff? Know the guidelines for displaying the flag, and learn about other national symbols.

www.usa.gov

 

[Rthur]

Hard game to play when the entirety of the media is spouting the other side's ideals.
An attempt to play their game in their arena is likely to fail.
Their current arrogance is likely the best weapon we have.
As they become more emboldened normal fence riders will become
much more willing to oppose.


R

 

[Blue Sky Country]

This can work miracles. Use their narrative against them.

'Gun laws that make mere possession of a firearm a criminal offense is racial profiling, because it automatically assumes that a black or Hispanic person carrying a gun is a criminal'.

'Gun control enables police brutality. An unarmed citizenry means state enforcers can brutalize anyone at will with no consequences. Defund the police and let people defend themselves their own way and as they see fit.'

'99% of the victims of unlawful stops and arrests by police are blacks and Hispanics on assumption that they are carrying guns. Decriminalize possession and carrying of handguns.'

Keep it going...

 

[HiDesertELR]

Hard game to play when the entirety of the media is spouting the other side's ideals.
An attempt to play their game in their arena is likely to fail.
Their current arrogance is likely the best weapon we have.
As they become more emboldened normal fence riders will become
much more willing to oppose.


R

Agreed about their arrogance

Nobody said this will be easy, but you start in your own backyard, and expand from there.

I'm challenging the "other side" to find different sources for their information, step outside their comfort zone, and at least make an effort to gain an understanding of where opposing viewpoints are coming from. If they say they don't care, then I tell them "that says it all, have a nice day (you dumb fuck sarcastically implied with intonation).

 

[Rthur]

Agreed about their arrogance

Nobody said this will be easy, but you start in your own backyard, and expand from there.

I'm challenging people to find different sources for their information, step outside their comfort zone, and at least make an effort to gain an understanding of where opposing opinions are coming from. If they say they don't care, then I tell them "that says it all, have a nice day (you dumb fuck).

More to the point.
Creation of our own channels/social media that they can't decide who or what is said.
Opposing opinions are coming from the cult of personality formed by the financiers
of levers of control.
I.E. NGOs looking for control of the tax slaves and assets
My backyard is at least 95% on board already.

R

 

[pmclaine]

If you give someone something for nothing, say a guaranteed basic income, than the value of that item is nothing.

The government has no power to "give". Whatever it provides it must take directly from someone else or promise to take from the future in order to have the value now.

Prove me wrong..........

 

[HiDesertELR]

More to the point.
Creation of our own channels/social media that they can't decide who or what is said.
Opposing opinions are coming from the cult of personality formed by the financiers
of levers of control.
I.E. NGOs looking for control of the tax slaves and assets
My backyard is at least 95% on board already.

R

Agreed, whole-heartedly. Let's document what you're saying with verifiable information (and I love the way you put it - that's why I'm calling on all of the smarter and more eloquent than me types here to fight this fight!).

We all need to gather those in agreement, and form more than an our own echo-chamber... we need our own grassroots organizations that can actually make a difference at the local level, and beyond.

Or else...

 

[HiDesertELR]

If you give someone something for nothing, say a guaranteed basic income, than the value of that item is nothing.

The government has no power to "give". Whatever it provides it must take directly from someone else or promise to take from the future in order to have the value now.

Prove me wrong..........

Counting on you to help this thread along - you're a gold mine.

 

[pmclaine]

Counting on you to help this thread along - you're a gold mine.

Most of this shit is basic level common sense or economics.

With AOC being an economics major out of a top tier school and spouting the shit she does I can only surmise she is dumb or a lying ass liars liar.

Worst case it is the education system and the creation of zombies

 

[Choid]

FWIW, UBI is preferable to a lot of other social programs. Milton Friedman wrote a lot about this and why. It is problematic when it is in addition to other programs, but by itself it shouldn't be so quickly discarded.

 

[HiDesertELR]

FWIW, UBI is preferable to a lot of other social programs. Milton Friedman wrote a lot about this and why. It is problematic when it is in addition to other programs, but by itself it shouldn't be so quickly discarded.

That's fine - post your link, or articles about what you're talking about.

Instead of debating amongst ourselves and trying to prove we're right to us, we need to have references that we can change the OTHER sides viewpoints, or at least open them up a little.

Most of this shit is basic level common sense or economics.

With AOC being an economics major out of a top tier school and spouting the shit she does I can only surmise she is dumb or a lying ass liars liar.

Worst case it is the education system and the creation of zombies

Yes, common sense to us... but the other side have been brainwashed by Marxist professors and PC culture MSM.

How do we "de-program" them instead of the other way around? Maybe them getting their wish list and watching it all play out is OK for some, but I'd rather counteract before their wish list fucks my family out of our future.

 

[HiDesertELR]

It was, as Owen put it, the perfect model of “utopian socialism.” And it failed less than a year later.

The Failed Socialist State in Midwestern America | MacIver Institute

www.maciverinstitute.com

 

[pmclaine]

FWIW, UBI is preferable to a lot of other social programs. Milton Friedman wrote a lot about this and why. It is problematic when it is in addition to other programs, but by itself it shouldn't be so quickly discarded.

Possible.........but not unless you require responsibility and enforce the hard lessons of irresponsibility.

 

[theLBC]

Most illegal immigrant crime is unreported because the criminals target innocent immigrants that are afraid of contact with the police.
Protecting illegal immigrant criminal entry hurts the folks democrats pretend to care about.

STUDY: Fearing Deportation, Latinos Don’t Report Crimes

thinkprogress.org

Also, illegal immigrants compete for the same low cost housing as legal residents.
This drives up rent costs for the poor while further enriching already wealthy property owners.

 

[Choid]

That's fine - post your link, or articles about what you're talking about.

Instead of debating amongst ourselves and trying to prove we're right to us, we need to have references that we can change the OTHER sides viewpoints, or at least open them up a little.


Yes, common sense to us... but the other side have been brainwashed by Marxist professors and PC culture MSM.

How do we "de-program" them instead of the other way around? Maybe them getting their wish list and watching it all play out is OK for some, but I'd rather counteract before their wish list fucks my family out of our future.

I think he wrote about it in Capitalism and Freedom, but I will have to check my bookshelf.

To sketch out the argument -- Let's assume, for a moment, that there is a societal belief that we need to provide for the poorest among us. There are basically two ways you can do that. You can provide them goods and services, or you can provide them the funds to procure the goods and services they desire. The argument for the second is many fold. First of all, it is less disruptive to the supply side of the equation. In other words, government does not become a supplier of, say, healthcare or food, rather it provides the cash to people to buy these things, meaning that individual demand is still signaling to the production side of the equation what people want. This is creates fewer disruptions, fewer false signals. Second, from a humanitarian point of view, people are different from other animals in large part because they have the ability to choose. By deciding what somebody should get, you are dehumanizing them more than you are when you give them money to choose what they want. Third, the mechanism for doing this is more simple than the current goods and services model. It requires fewer government workers, fewer government agencies etc. Fourth, it is more simple tax wise. You could institute a tax regime where you have a line at, say 40k, and any dollar above that gets taxed at a flat rate for earners, while every dollar between 0 and 40k gets distributed to low earners at a flat rate. That way it is always an advantage to earn more, there is never any disincentive for work as in our current system.

Sure, it isn't perfect, and nobody would love it. The major problem would be that government isn't interested in helping individuals as much as it is interested in controlling them, so people who believe in government believe in the goods and service model. Still, the argument of the universal basic income model is much stronger, from a conservative point of view, than it is for the welfare state.

I present this to you in the spirit of the thread, because this is a real issue coming up and most people don't understand it from any holistic point of view. You can't argue with people just by calling them commies, and now you have a pretty good sketch into the genesis and arguments of Universal Basic Income, or, the idea of a negative income tax.

 

[Choid]

Possible.........but not unless you require responsibility and enforce the hard lessons of irresponsibility.

Yes, this is an issue. You still end up with people making choices you don't like, but at least they are making choices. A lot of people cannot deal with this reality. I embrace it.

 

[theLBC]

Obama spent $7 Billion to find that no amount of money will fix public schools that are chronically failing.
And yet, democrats will continue to blame funding for failing schools!
Why? Each child's future the democrats can destroy is a potential vote for them.

The $7 Billion School Improvement Grant Program: Greatest Failure in the History of the U.S. Department of Education?

The final IES report on the School Improvement Grant program is devastating to Arne Duncan’s and the Obama administration’s education legacy.

www.educationnext.org

The only thing that worked was replacing all the union teachers and principal at one school with people that wanted the kids to succeed.
Unfortunately, they could not fire the crap teachers, and had to force other schools to take them.

 

[pmclaine]

but the other side have been brainwashed by Marxist professors and PC culture MSM.

How do we "de-program" them instead of the other way around? Maybe them getting their wish list and watching it all play out is OK for some, but I'd rather counteract before their wish list fucks my family out of our future.

They are the useful idiots......

Marxism is not about freedom, it is all about control.

Leftist Revolution brings Counter Revolution and installation of the all powerful Government.

 

[Choid]

Obama spent $7 Billion to find that no amount of money will fix public schools that are chronically failing.
And yet, democrats will continue to blame funding for failing schools!
Why? Each child's future the democrats can destroy is a potential vote for them.

The $7 Billion School Improvement Grant Program: Greatest Failure in the History of the U.S. Department of Education?

The final IES report on the School Improvement Grant program is devastating to Arne Duncan’s and the Obama administration’s education legacy.

www.educationnext.org

If you care about education in this country, this is the single best organization on the topic, and they are doing great work.

HOMEPAGE (2022) - Pioneer Institute

JobMakers is a podcast, produced by Pioneer Institute and The Immigrant Learning Center, in which Denzil Mohammed explores the world of risk-taking immigrants who create new products, services, and jobs […]

pioneerinstitute.org

 

[HiDesertELR]

They are the useful idiots......

Marxism is not about freedom, it is all about control.

Leftist Revolution brings Counter Revolution and installation of the all powerful Government.

Agreed. Let's get some links to some good articles and history that proves this out. I know you got 'em

Or, I'll go find some. I'm in the middle of an experiment in the kitchen, hands are covered in flour and I'm ruining a keyboard as we speak

 

[pmclaine]

Yes, this is an issue. You still end up with people making choices you don't like, but at least they are making choices. A lot of people cannot deal with this reality. I embrace it.

I like their choices.

Issue is that libs than feel they still need to provide more.....

One of the world's largest basic-income trials, a 2-year program in Finland, was a major flop. But experts say the test was flawed.

Two years after Finland launched a basic-income trial for unemployed residents, many of the recipients remained jobless.

www.businessinsider.com

Finland's 'free cash' experiment fails to boost employment

But scheme giving unemployed £475 a month did leave participants happier and healthier

www.theguardian.com

Socialism fails because it sucks.........not because there wasnt enough or it wasnt pure enough.

 

[Choid]

I like their choices.

Issue is that libs than feel they still need to provide more.....

One of the world's largest basic-income trials, a 2-year program in Finland, was a major flop. But experts say the test was flawed.

Two years after Finland launched a basic-income trial for unemployed residents, many of the recipients remained jobless.

www.businessinsider.com

Finland's 'free cash' experiment fails to boost employment

But scheme giving unemployed £475 a month did leave participants happier and healthier

www.theguardian.com

Socialism fails because it sucks.........not because there wasnt enough or it wasnt pure enough.

Sure. That doesn't mean that understanding the ins and outs of it isn't useful. It's easy to say socialism sucks, and it does, but it isn't particularly convincing to anybody else.

 

[theLBC]

anyone notice that since trump stopped most of the bombing of goat herders and people just dealing with day to day problems of living in bumfuck middle east, there has been less islamic terrorist incidents and the narrative has shifted to white christian terrorist threats now?

 

[pmclaine]

Sure. That doesn't mean that understanding the ins and outs of it isn't useful. It's easy to say socialism sucks, and it does, but it isn't particularly convincing to anybody else.

Universal Basic Income: A Universally Bad Idea

Chicago and Stockton (CA) are the latest to join the Universal Basic Income (UBI) craze. But experimenting with UBI is just a wasteful distraction from the real pressing challenge: building the right skills for the new economy.

www.forbes.com

The Top Three Arguments against a Universal Basic Income | Brittany Hunter

If America cannot financially maintain its current welfare system, it would be an unwise to believe it could somehow afford a Universal Basic Income. As Robert Colvile says when comparing one welfare system with the other, “It’s old wine in new bottles – redistributive, seventies-style taxation...

fee.org

 

[Choid]

anyone notice that since trump stopped most of the bombing of goat herders and people just dealing with day to day problems of living in bumfuck middle east, there has been less islamic terrorist incidents and the narrative has shifted to white christian terrorist threats now?

I don't know how old you are (seriously) but this is my third Democratic administration as an adult, and I remember both in early Clinton and early Obama, the emphasis switched immediately to "domestic" terror threats. It has nothing to do with the Middle East. It is their game.

 

[rady]

I'll take a stab at this issue, which I believe starts with unbiased reporting of the truth. I think that the conservative view point is being snuffed out, both on the air waves and the internet thanks to big tech.

Having a platform that can compete with the likes of fb, yt, twitless, fox, local network news, ect. is going to be difficult. I'm glad to see that Newsmax is starting to outdo fox, but the internet will be a difficult challenge. Just look at what is being done to Parler and similar conservative outlets. I won't even comment what happened to AR15.com recently.

I'm hoping that people with the resources can do something about the likes of google, fb, and apple. The demand is there as witnessed by the loss of revenue by fb reported last week. Losses in the billions of $$ when they banned the Donald.

Those with the resources could make a fortune, but it seems that most of the billionaires are part of the club that wants to enslave us.

Since I don't have a wealth of information with regard to big tech, I think John Lovell does a good job of explaining what is happening today. Pay particular attention to what he states about the millennials. MrGunsandGear also has just addressed what Bloomberg has done utilizing the Trace (

Bloomberg Is Coming After Me & Social Media Influencers). This is directed at pro-gun groups. Both of these videos are worth looking at.​

 

[Choid]

Universal Basic Income: A Universally Bad Idea

Chicago and Stockton (CA) are the latest to join the Universal Basic Income (UBI) craze. But experimenting with UBI is just a wasteful distraction from the real pressing challenge: building the right skills for the new economy.

www.forbes.com

The Top Three Arguments against a Universal Basic Income | Brittany Hunter

If America cannot financially maintain its current welfare system, it would be an unwise to believe it could somehow afford a Universal Basic Income. As Robert Colvile says when comparing one welfare system with the other, “It’s old wine in new bottles – redistributive, seventies-style taxation...

fee.org

Neither of these address what I put forth. The first by definition, that is is necessarily non means tested, and the second by assuming a both/and approach rather than an either/or. I am not saying it is a good idea in today's society. I am saying that, by itself, it is a more conservative approach to these issues than is a generalized welfare state.

 

[HiDesertELR]

This probably a little biased, but it's a start to a conversation with those with TDS

Trump Administration Accomplishments | The White House

Unprecedented Economic Boom Before the China Virus invaded our shores, we built the world’s most prosperous economy. America gained 7 million new jobs - mo

www.whitehouse.gov

This one has links:

Full list of President Trumps Accomplishments

This list comes from magapill.com all credit goes to them. This is amazing! National Security The United State...

wsau.com

 

[pmclaine]

anyone notice that since trump stopped most of the bombing of goat herders and people just dealing with day to day problems of living in bumfuck middle east, there has been less islamic terrorist incidents and the narrative has shifted to white christian terrorist threats now?

Judge and some bystanders killed in Astan today with the sharp point out that Trump has reduced troops to 2500......so basically its his fault.

Stuff is still happening except now the realization is thats their problem to fix.

Soon our Neocon/Mics will again make it our problem.

The left has always been apologists for radical muslim terror - the lone wolf - while any other crime in the US implicates the whole entire group.

Omar Mateen, lone-wolf terrorist

What does it mean that the Orlando shooter pledged allegiance to ISIS?

www.brookings.edu

Gun Culture and the American Nightmare of Violence – BillMoyers.com

Gun violence in the United States has produced a culture soaked in blood – a culture that threatens everyone and extends from accidental deaths, suicides and domestic violence to mass shootings. In late December, a woman in St. Cloud, Florida, fatally shot her own daughter after mistaking her...

billmoyers.com

 

[theLBC]

I don't know how old you are (seriously) but this is my third Democratic administration as an adult, and I remember both in early Clinton and early Obama, the emphasis switched immediately to "domestic" terror threats. It has nothing to do with the Middle East. It is their game.

when i fart, dust comes out.
basically this is what i am saying (that they will invent an enemy if they can't create one by killing innocents).
without an enemy to fight, they can't get funding and get away with all the shit they do "to protect us".

 

[Choid]

when i fart, dust comes out.
basically this is what i am saying (that they will invent an enemy if they can't create one by killing innocents).
without an enemy to fight, they can't get funding and get away with all the shit they do "to protect us".

I guess the next step in aging is that when you fart, shit comes out.

 

[HiDesertELR]

"...the Federalist Papers are often used today to help interpret the intentions of those drafting the Constitution."

Federalist papers with links to the table of contents:

Research Guides: Federalist Papers: Primary Documents in American History: Full Text of The Federalist Papers

The Federalist Papers were a series of essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the pen name "Publius." This guide compiles Library of Congress digital materials, external websites, and a print bibliography.

guides.loc.gov

Copy of the Federalist Papers (PDF):

https://thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/The-Complete-Federalist-Papers.pdf

 

[Familydude]

I guess the next step in aging is that when you fart, shit comes out.

Bad seafood and heavy alcohol consumption. Same result.

 

[pmclaine]

Neither of these address what I put forth. The first by definition, that is is necessarily non means tested, and the second by assuming a both/and approach rather than an either/or. I am not saying it is a good idea in today's society. I am saying that, by itself, it is a more conservative approach to these issues than is a generalized welfare state.

24.1 What Is Money? – Principles of Economics

open.lib.umn.edu

Key Takeaways​

• Money is anything that serves as a medium of exchange. Other functions of money are to serve as a unit of account and as a store of value.
• Money may or may not have intrinsic value. Commodity money has intrinsic value because it has other uses besides being a medium of exchange. Fiat money serves only as a medium of exchange, because its use as such is authorized by the government; it has no intrinsic value.
• The Fed reports several different measures of money, including M1 and M2.

Economists use the word “fiat,” which in Latin means “let it be done,” to describe money that has no intrinsic value. Such forms of money usually get their value because a government or authority has declared them to be legal tender, but, as this story shows, it does not really require much “fiat” for a convenient, in-and-of-itself worthless, medium of exchange to evolve.

The money in UBI is "fiat".

Since we decoupled from gold all US money is fiat only deriving value from the users faith in the continuance of the country.

What does UBI do to money that was earned in exchange for goods and services and therefore was endowed with a veneer of commodity value?

If I am a car dealer and I know that everyone walking through the door is provided $5000 monthly for waking up than the starting price of my car immediately starts at some arbitrary percent of that persons UBI.

Its money with no sweat equity, it devalues the money of those that earn more through their sweat equity or entrepreneurship, it creates inflation as manufacturers have to charge increased prices to compensate for all these zero value dollars in the economy.

I get what you are saying regards UBI "could" be a better system than welfare if all other safety net were removed. They are one and the same if open ended, never impose responsibility and provide a standard of living greater than that earned by those willing to work. In MA typical welfare exceeds starting/mid career pay for many.

Study: Massachusetts welfare pays better than entry-level jobs

Massachusetts pays its welfare recipients what would amount an pre-tax wage of more than $24 an hour, and ranks third in the nation in terms of dollars doled out per welfare collector, according to…

www.bostonherald.com

The problem is with either system it will never be permitted to require measures that incentivize work.

Why now is a person on welfare with set costs for food and shelter entirely provided by welfare penalized by loss of all welfare if they were to take a job that does not cover their costs of living?

Wouldnt it make sense to continue welfare just reduce it by some amount say 75% of their new income. Thus rewarding them for getting work, providing them with enough welfare to live and maybe allowing them surplus income to get the training or child care they need to get an even better job?

Im with this guy....

Benjamin Franklin > Quotes > Quotable Quote​

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”​

― Benjamin Franklin

 

[Snipe260]

Require every American citizen to watch every series of “Mr Rogers Neighborhood”!

 

[Choid]

24.1 What Is Money? – Principles of Economics

open.lib.umn.edu

Key Takeaways​

• Money is anything that serves as a medium of exchange. Other functions of money are to serve as a unit of account and as a store of value.
• Money may or may not have intrinsic value. Commodity money has intrinsic value because it has other uses besides being a medium of exchange. Fiat money serves only as a medium of exchange, because its use as such is authorized by the government; it has no intrinsic value.
• The Fed reports several different measures of money, including M1 and M2.

Economists use the word “fiat,” which in Latin means “let it be done,” to describe money that has no intrinsic value. Such forms of money usually get their value because a government or authority has declared them to be legal tender, but, as this story shows, it does not really require much “fiat” for a convenient, in-and-of-itself worthless, medium of exchange to evolve.

The money in UBI is "fiat".

Since we decoupled from gold all US money is fiat only deriving value from the users faith in the continuance of the country.

What does UBI do to money that was earned in exchange for goods and services and therefore was endowed with a veneer of commodity value?

If I am a car dealer and I know that everyone walking through the door is provided $5000 monthly for waking up than the starting price of my car immediately starts at some arbitrary percent of that persons UBI.

Its money with no sweat equity, it devalues the money of those that earn more through their sweat equity or entrepreneurship, it creates inflation as manufacturers have to charge increased prices to compensate for all these zero value dollars in the economy.

I get what you are saying regards UBI "could" be a better system than welfare if all other safety net were removed. They are one and the same if open ended, never impose responsibility and provide a standard of living greater than that earned by those willing to work. In MA typical welfare exceeds starting/mid career pay for many.

Study: Massachusetts welfare pays better than entry-level jobs

Massachusetts pays its welfare recipients what would amount an pre-tax wage of more than $24 an hour, and ranks third in the nation in terms of dollars doled out per welfare collector, according to…

www.bostonherald.com

The problem is with either system it will never be permitted to require measures that incentivize work.

Why now is a person on welfare with set costs for food and shelter entirely provided by welfare penalized by loss of all welfare if they were to take a job that does not cover their costs of living?

Wouldnt it make sense to continue welfare just reduce it by some amount say 75% of their new income. Thus rewarding them for getting work, providing them with enough welfare to live and maybe allowing them surplus income to get the training or child care they need to get an even better job?

Im with this guy....

Benjamin Franklin > Quotes > Quotable Quote​

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”​

― Benjamin Franklin

Look, I'm sorry but your grasp of money is tenuous at best. You are mixing a bunch of metaphors to try to make a point. I get the point, and I don't necessarily disagree that UBI is untenable given the political realities in which we find ourselves, but that has basically nothing to do with what you posted here about money. Since this is literally what I have done my entire career, I will try to help you out. I don't mean to be a dick, I am literally trying to help.

1. Yes, money is anything that can be exchanged for other goods. It is a bridge in the barter system. Without money if you wanted to turn your corn into my cows, you would have had to find people to make all of the various trades until you had turned your corn into what I wanted in exchange for my cows, now we use money.

2. Yes, fiat money is money we have all agreed to use as currency without any "intrinsic" value as a commodity itself. But it is a little more complicated than that. For example, in a gold economy, you would have to understand that only part of the value of gold qua gold would be in it's "intrinsic" value, and the rest in its suitability as a trading medium. So even hard currencies are not inextricably linked from their "intrinsic" value. That is a fine, but unimportant point.

3. But let's assume for a moment that we have a dual currency economy. Fiat dollars and gold. UBI payments could be in either, right? So UBI payments would not, by definition, be fiat currency. You are trying to use fiat currency first as a negative (it isn't) and then link it to UBI (it isn't) to make UBI a negative (it might be, but not because of that.)

4. The car argument is an interesting one to choose. It isn't necessarily true that the car dealer would be able to raise his prices simply because of the larger amount of currency in circulation. If the demand produced by that currency was dedicated to cars, sure, but there is no reason to think that would be the case, that the demand would go to cars or would go equally to all goods and services. There is theoretical reason to believe we would see inflation, but there is significant reason to think we should have seen inflation throughout at least the last two decades, but the majority of that inflation has been in asset values (stock prices rising) while consumer inflation has been tame. I still believe in the neoclassical understanding of inflation, but it gets harder to do so yearly.

5. Money is in no way related to sweat equity. Fiat or otherwise. Assume, again for argument, that all you did all day was sit on your porch and drink tea. Nice life, not much sweat. Now, assume you got your UBI delivered in cash, a pallet like Obama did for Iran. That is really no different than if you went down to the river and were washing your toes, and a big gold rock washed up and you picked it up. It is still money, still no sweat equity. The two are unrelated, and understanding that there is no moral value to money is something that is hard for people to take, on both sides. It simply is. In the real world, of course, neither happens, but there is still no correlation between sweat and wealth. There is a correlation between utility and wealth. Utility is far less of a moral issue than labor. It is the fundamental Marxist error.

6. There is no quesiton that welfare produces a disincentive to work. It creates a lot of perverse incentives. Any time the government barges into the markets you will get perverse incentives. The beauty of UBI, as understood by Friedman which is more like a universal tax credit, is that it doesn't have that disincentive. Never is marginal labor penalized.

So, again, I agree that UBI is probably untenable because of the political realities surrounding it. That is the truth when it comes to a lot of things. Social programs are much easier to pay for and justify without mass immigration as well, but there are issues there on both sides. In the long run I am not sure I can agree with Franklin there because I don't see it as a moral issue as much as an economic one. I would rather do what needs to be done with the least incursion into the market possible, because the true costs to society in disrupting economic signals through government intrusion is higher than the cost of marginally too many direct transfer payments.

 

[HiDesertELR]

Look, I'm sorry but your grasp of money is tenuous at best. You are mixing a bunch of metaphors to try to make a point. I get the point, and I don't necessarily disagree that UBI is untenable given the political realities in which we find ourselves, but that has basically nothing to do with what you posted here about money. Since this is literally what I have done my entire career, I will try to help you out. I don't mean to be a dick, I am literally trying to help.

1. Yes, money is anything that can be exchanged for other goods. It is a bridge in the barter system. Without money if you wanted to turn your corn into my cows, you would have had to find people to make all of the various trades until you had turned your corn into what I wanted in exchange for my cows, now we use money.

2. Yes, fiat money is money we have all agreed to use as currency without any "intrinsic" value as a commodity itself. But it is a little more complicated than that. For example, in a gold economy, you would have to understand that only part of the value of gold qua gold would be in it's "intrinsic" value, and the rest in its suitability as a trading medium. So even hard currencies are not inextricably linked from their "intrinsic" value. That is a fine, but unimportant point.

3. But let's assume for a moment that we have a dual currency economy. Fiat dollars and gold. UBI payments could be in either, right? So UBI payments would not, by definition, be fiat currency. You are trying to use fiat currency first as a negative (it isn't) and then link it to UBI (it isn't) to make UBI a negative (it might be, but not because of that.)

4. The car argument is an interesting one to choose. It isn't necessarily true that the car dealer would be able to raise his prices simply because of the larger amount of currency in circulation. If the demand produced by that currency was dedicated to cars, sure, but there is no reason to think that would be the case, that the demand would go to cars or would go equally to all goods and services. There is theoretical reason to believe we would see inflation, but there is significant reason to think we should have seen inflation throughout at least the last two decades, but the majority of that inflation has been in asset values (stock prices rising) while consumer inflation has been tame. I still believe in the neoclassical understanding of inflation, but it gets harder to do so yearly.

5. Money is in no way related to sweat equity. Fiat or otherwise. Assume, again for argument, that all you did all day was sit on your porch and drink tea. Nice life, not much sweat. Now, assume you got your UBI delivered in cash, a pallet like Obama did for Iran. That is really no different than if you went down to the river and were washing your toes, and a big gold rock washed up and you picked it up. It is still money, still no sweat equity. The two are unrelated, and understanding that there is no moral value to money is something that is hard for people to take, on both sides. It simply is. In the real world, of course, neither happens, but there is still no correlation between sweat and wealth. There is a correlation between utility and wealth. Utility is far less of a moral issue than labor. It is the fundamental Marxist error.

6. There is no quesiton that welfare produces a disincentive to work. It creates a lot of perverse incentives. Any time the government barges into the markets you will get perverse incentives. The beauty of UBI, as understood by Friedman which is more like a universal tax credit, is that it doesn't have that disincentive. Never is marginal labor penalized.

So, again, I agree that UBI is probably untenable because of the political realities surrounding it. That is the truth when it comes to a lot of things. Social programs are much easier to pay for and justify without mass immigration as well, but there are issues there on both sides. In the long run I am not sure I can agree with Franklin there because I don't see it as a moral issue as much as an economic one. I would rather do what needs to be done with the least incursion into the market possible, because the true costs to society in disrupting economic signals through government intrusion is higher than the cost of marginally too many direct transfer payments.

Yo, can we keep the insults and arguing amongst ourselves to a minimum, please? I know it's the Pit, but there's plenty of other threads to call each other shart-gargling fucksticks and challenge each other to a pistol duel on the front lawn at noon...

 

[HiDesertELR]

From 2010... scary how applicable it is right now.

The Obama administration "is the embodiment, the personification, and the culmination of dangerous trends that began decades ago," trends that are "dismantling America." Sowell sees this in the dismantling of marriage, of culture, and of self-government.

 

[srtsam]

Obama spent $7 Billion to find that no amount of money will fix public schools that are chronically failing.
And yet, democrats will continue to blame funding for failing schools!
Why? Each child's future the democrats can destroy is a potential vote for them.

The $7 Billion School Improvement Grant Program: Greatest Failure in the History of the U.S. Department of Education?

The final IES report on the School Improvement Grant program is devastating to Arne Duncan’s and the Obama administration’s education legacy.

www.educationnext.org

The only thing that worked was replacing all the union teachers and principal at one school with people that wanted the kids to succeed.
Unfortunately, they could not fire the crap teachers, and had to force other schools to take them.

The money never really makes it to the schools. This is where the classic ”rider clauses” make their way onto the bills. Because, everybody hears education and their always quick to agree. scratch away the surface and very little makes to where we all think we are giving money to. This is why education bills are always being thrown at us. Only a monster would say no to kids getting new books, stationary etc..... meanwhile, almost all of the money is siphoned off because there are administrative costs, long overdue raises, new football logos, grass, etc.... and then there is the money that needs to get set aside to watch fish fuck and transgender studies of an extinct people to better understand today’s trans people. Or some such shit. i always vote no to education bills. Always.

 

[UKDslayer]

Heres a start:

 

[HiDesertELR]

5 minutes - Keynesian Economics and Deficit Spending​

 

[HiDesertELR]

Why Socialism Is the Failed Idea That Never Dies | Dr Rainer Zitelmann

Over the past hundred years, there have been more than two dozen attempts to build a socialist society. All of these attempts have ended in varying degrees of failure. So why have socialist ideas become so attractive again?

fee.org

Why Socialism Fails

The Soviet disaster shows that modern economies are too complex to plan.

www.hoover.org

From a Forbes article:

The resurgence of self-described “democratic socialists” in the last few years leaves me somewhat puzzled. It’s not like we don’t have a pretty solid track record on socialism—and one that was foreseen by Eugene Richter well before the Bolsheviks rose to power in Russia. What gives?

In his 2019 book Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies, Kristian Niemietz of London’s Institute of Economic Affairs explains a three-act “people’s romance,” to borrow Daniel Klein’s phrase. The first act, shortly after the Revolution, is the “honeymoon.” Defenders of the noble experiment tweak the skeptical neoliberal naysayers by pointing to apparent short-run successes. They say things like “the naysayers said socialism can’t work, but [insert name of latest socialist darling here] proves otherwise!” They proclaim, as the journalist Lincoln Steffens did upon seeing the Soviet economy in operation, “I have seen the future, and it works!”

Except that it doesn’t. As time goes on, socialism’s internal contradictions begin to overtake the short-run gains. This leads to act two, the “excuses-and-whatabouttery” phase. Here we learn that collectivized agriculture or “land reform” would have worked had the weather cooperated. Or we learn that it wasn’t socialism that failed; rather, oil prices plunged. Or we learn that socialism might have its problems but capitalism isn’t perfect, either.

Finally, Niemietz notes, we end up at the end of the history of socialist apologetics in act three: the “not-real-socialism” phase. Here we learn that “socialism hasn’t failed; socialism hasn’t been tried.” Early enthusiasm for the regime’s experiment as proof that socialism could work ends up in the memory hole, and apologists for socialism claim that the USSR, China, Cambodia, and other places weren’t “real socialism” even though a lot of those same apologists were claiming that these societies were proof that socialism could work, at least during the honeymoon phase. As he writes on page 63:

“...Western cheerleaders flocked to the Soviet Union in their thousands, and returned full of praise. At that time, the claim that Stalinism did not constitute ‘real’ socialism would have seemed outlandish.”

Stalinism didn’t become “not real socialism” until its failures became too obvious to ignore. In any event, it wasn’t like the defenders of the regime didn’t know what was going on. Niemietz quotes The Jungle author Upton Sinclair on p. 79: “There has never been in human history a great social change without killing.” He quotes Jean-Paul Sartre on p. 108:

“A revolutionary regime must get rid of a certain number of individuals that threaten it and I see no other means for this than death; it is always possible to get out of a prison; the revolutionaries of 1793 probably didn’t kill enough people.”

This looks like evidence for Bryan Caplan’s thesis that communism was “born bad” in his foreword to a new edition of Pictures of the Socialistic Future: As Caplan puts it, totalitarianism was part of the early communists’ starry-eyed idealism. Apparently, mass murder was a feature rather than a bug.

Niemietz goes through several examples and shows how the pattern repeated itself time and again in the USSR, China, Cambodia, and elsewhere. Why, in spite of overwhelming evidence, do people cling to a socialist vision? Niemietz puts it this way on p. xiv:

“The case for capitalism is counterintuitive: to most of us, capitalism simply feels wrong. Socialism, in contrast, chimes with our moral intuitions. Socialism simply feels right.”

Feelings can be deceptive, however, and good intentions do not readily translate into good outcomes. Socialism, as Niemietz explains, has failed repeatedly. It never dies—but it should.

Art Carden, Forbes

 

[Choid]

Yo, can we keep the insults and arguing amongst ourselves to a minimum, please? I know it's the Pit, but there's plenty of other threads to call each other shart-gargling fucksticks and challenge each other to a pistol duel on the front lawn at noon...

Sure, though I think hashing out the differences inside the conservative side is certainly useful in understanding our own narratives. I mean no disrespect in what I said, I just think he is wrong in some ways. I am sure he thinks the same of me, but reading both sides probably gives a better understanding of the issues, which is what I think your point is -- to move past screaming about how unfair things are or calling people commies and towards having something else to say.

ETA: If this is just about why socialism sucks, read The Road to Serfdom. It says everything you need to know.

 

[HiDesertELR]

Sure, though I think hashing out the differences inside the conservative side is certainly useful in understanding our own narratives. I mean no disrespect in what I said, I just think he is wrong in some ways. I am sure he thinks the same of me, but reading both sides probably gives a better understanding of the issues, which is what I think your point is -- to move past screaming about how unfair things are or calling people commies and towards having something else to say.

ETA: If this is just about why socialism sucks, read The Road to Serfdom. It says everything you need to know.

If a little blood-sport and full contact discourse is needed to keep the thread going... I get it. It's probably get boring otherwise

No, not trying to make it a "why socialism sucks" thread (we all know why, it's "them" that don't), but a multi-faceted talking points thread - foreign policy, economics, social issues, crime, 1A, 2A, etc - all backed by truth and history (not opinion). As irrefutable as possible to decisively win the conversations with the opposition. Like a one-stop shop for arguments that we can reference and post/send to the jackasses in our lives.

They say Einstein didn't know his own phone number, because he knew where to go to find it...

 

[Choid]

If a little blood-sport and full contact discourse is needed to keep the thread going... I get it. It's probably get boring otherwise

No, not trying to make it a "why socialism sucks" thread (we all know why, it's "them" that don't), but a multi-faceted talking points thread - foreign policy, economics, social issues, crime, 1A, 2A, etc - all backed by truth and history (not opinion). As irrefutable as possible to decisively win the conversations with the opposition. Like a one-stop shop for arguments that we can reference and post/send to the jackasses in our lives.

I think the most poignant and irrefutable historical argument, in the sense you are talking about, has to do with the virtual book burnings on the left, because that is really what is going on. Book bannings, curtailment of speech etc, have always been associated with societies in the decline toward totalitarianism, whether left or right. It is frightening that it is happening, but there are many historical examples of how bad it tends to get.

Relatedly, that is a great way for the right to become a bigger tent movement. I might not agree with pmaclaine on X or Y, but we should both be able to exist on the same side because we don't fear other ideas.

 

[The King]

“The way to win this is to take over the schools, media, and internet. Sell phones to people that pipe this shit into their bathrooms. Control the entire narrative. Punch out college students who are violent sociopaths willing to kill everyone that disagrees with us at the drop of a hat.” - Socialists, 1990

“We won! Activate the Death Squads!”. Socialists, 2021.

You didn’t win. And you won’t. It’s over. Like it always was going to be once they had taken over all of the Logistics.

 

[HiDesertELR]

A Brief History of Book Burning, From the Printing Press to Internet Archives

As long as there have been books, people have burned them—but over the years, the motivation has changed

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[HiDesertELR]

“The way to win this is to take over the schools, media, and internet. Sell phones to people that pipe this shit into their bathrooms. Control the entire narrative. Punch out college students who are violent sociopaths willing to kill everyone that disagrees with us at the drop of a hat.” - Socialists, 1990

“We won! Activate the Death Squads!”. Socialists, 2021.

You didn’t win. And you won’t. It’s over. Like it always was going to be once they had taken over all of the Logistics.

 

[SilentStalkr]

Resources to combat AntiGun BS:

Crime/Law Enforcement Stats (UCR Program) | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The UCR Program's primary objective is to generate reliable information for use in law enforcement administration, operation, and management.

www.fbi.gov

Reports and Publications — FBI

A listing of reports and publications pertaining to stats and services within various FBI programs.

www.fbi.gov

Crime statistics

This series brings together all documents relating to crime statistics.

www.gov.uk

Crosstabulation of SHR Known Offender Level Data

Easy Access to the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Reports (EZASHR) provides access to more than twenty years of data on homicide victims and known homicide offenders, including information on the age, sex, and race of victims and offenders, the...

www.ojjdp.gov

Data & Statistics | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Available from no other source, this comprehensive collection of ATF-related data from national surveys, state-based surveys, other collected license statistics, and other data sources documents trends in firearms, commerce and use of federal services in the United States. United States Bomb...

www.atf.gov

Gun Facts | Gun Control Policy Insights

Gun Facts is an ongoing project to bring honesty into the debate about guns, violence and control.

www.gunfacts.info

OnTheIssues.org - Candidates on the Issues

www.ontheissues.org

Why Not Renew the “Assault Weapons” Ban? Well, I’ll Tell You…

[EDIT: After this article was published, the Democratic party officially added support of the assault weapon ban renewal to their party platform and it was reintroduced in the following Senate sess…

kontradictions.wordpress.com

The Facts about Mass Shootings | National Review

A few things you won’t hear about from the saturation coverage of the Newtown, Conn., school massacre: Mass shootings are no more common than they have been in past decades, despite the impression …

www.nationalreview.com

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of government data. Beneath the long-term trend, though, are big differences...

www.pewsocialtrends.org

Just a few to get you started. These are going to be needed over the next few years I believe. @HiDesertELR

 

[HiDesertELR]

Love him or hate him, dude has some argument skills

11 rules for debating a Leftist from Ben Shapiro | Blaze Media

Tricks for debating family, friends and foes.

www.theblaze.com