Comments by "" (@thehumanity0) on "" video.

@laserbeamlightning Lol equating Bernie's vision to China is the same strawman Republicans make about Venezuela. Considering Bernie has said about a bajillion times he's talking about Europe and Scandinavian Democratic Socialism, it's pretty disingenuous what you're doing.
3
@markp6621 It should give everyone here extreme discomfort that Silicon Valley and big tech elites widely knew about this short story and scenario, and have since been starting to push support behind a federal basic income (when I first heard this is when I first started having doubts about UBI). It should also give people pause that not only is Yang for a federal income, but he's also voiced strong disagreement with breaking up big tech companies and monopolies in the US. I currently do not support Yang, but IF yang was in favor of breaking up monopolies and IF he funded his UBI through placing high taxes on corporations and the wealthy such as a top marginal tax rate, capital gains tax, estate tax, a much higher corporate tax, and ending corporate welfare, I would likely support him in some form. However, Yang is not for those things and the "Manna" story is exactly the scenario I fear from a libertarian-leaning UBI program. I am not saying this to take swipes at Yang, I think he is a genuine person, but it doesn't diminish my REAL concerns over the future he proposes.
3
Bernie is for real systemic change. Yang supporters are seriously mischaracterizing his platform and literally saying shit like "he wants to make us into slaves". These are not serious people saying this crap, or even to the extent of pretending like FJG is Bernie's big policy idea like UBI is for Yang. Bernie has an entire package of progressive policies, and FJG is realistically a sub-program of his Green New Deal, a plan designed to boldly deal with the existential threat of Climate Change. The simple argument of supporting Bernie over Yang rests with if you actually want Medicare for All or you want to risk Yang who has constantly flip flopped between a public option just like Warren has. $1,000 won't mean shit unless we do away with our for-profit private insurance system along with canceling medical debt.
3
The first step would be if Yang and his supporters were to accurately portray Bernie's policies. At least Bernie supporters acknowledge and understand Yang's policies, UBI funded by a VAT tax, Democracy Dollars, lower carbon emissions 90% by 2050, placing a sunset provision on all regulations, we disagree on the outcomes of those policies, but I don't see anyone mischaracterizing what his actual platform is. When you talk about UBI vs Bernie's policies, it's not just a job's guarantee, it's an entire Economic Bill of Rights. It realistically should be a debate between universal basic income vs universal basic standard. Bernie literally has T-Shirts with this platform on it (healthcare for all, education for all, housing for all, jobs for all, justice for all) so why can't yang supporters get it right? A job's guarantee is only a smaller portion of a basic standard of living aka a robust social safety net like Denmark or Norway. You can disagree and argue why you think UBI is better or worse, but at least acknowledge this is the real difference and the real debate between their platforms.
3
Nobody can live off of it, that's the problem. Yang proposes a future scenario where 30% of the population is "inevitably" out of the workforce due to automation. If you have that much of the workforce automated people WILL be unemployed no matter if they want to be or not. So these people will be forced to live off a non-livable wage that might only become worse with the rise of inflation whether it's caused from UBI or just normal inflation (How does no one else see this fallacy?). It's like the origin story of a dystopian future where everybody is poor and lives off a below livable federal allowance while the ultra wealthy continue to amass power over everyone else. If we do not try to change the system now, then people would grow complacent and lazy on this federal allowance and the gap of wealth and power will only be solidified and widened much further.
2
@Koryogden Working 40 hours a week on a minimum wage of $7.50 is still thousands more than Yang's $12,000. The current minimum wage is not a livable wage, so why exactly do you think Yang's $12,000 is when the option with the larger income is not even close to a livable wage.
2
That would make the most sense. Also do a basic income that is funded by a capital gains tax, top marginal tax rate, and stacks on top of SSI.
2
I see where Yang is coming from and I do believe he's a genuine candidate who believes what he says, but he is very much mischaracterizing Bernie's job's guarantee policy and mischaracterizing his whole position in general, I will explain. Firstly, a job's guarantee is not to simply "give everyone a federal job", it's purpose is to create jobs either federal or federally funded through private entities, and those jobs, in turn, force private corporations to compete the labor and wages set by government funded entities that create the jobs and set the wages that the market will have to compete with. I won't get anymore into this though, because I think the next part is way more important. Secondly, if you're serious about this debate, everyone here should read or skim over Bernie's Workplace Democracy Act ( https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/workplace-democracy-act-summary-?inline=file ), it's a bold and robust pro-union pro-worker plan to incentivize worker co-ops and worker representation within leadership roles in already existing corporations that has the effects of creating an economy and democracy in the workplace that works for EVERYONE in a corporation not just the CEOs and board members receiving $500 million for outsourcing deals. In the the same future scenario that Yang presents where 30% of the workforce is unemployed, under a Workplace Democracy Act and giant reforms to labor laws, we would see a chain of events where workers could prevent automation from taking their jobs in the first place when you have a corporation that, instead of having all the benefits of automation go directly to the Top, to CEOs and top execs, you have automation benefit EVERYONE in a company, where instead of workers losing their jobs and going on a federal basic income, you have workers KEEP their jobs, KEEP their salaries, and the result of automation ends up HALVING their work days or cutting it down by a third, etc. In this proposed economy, you have automation and advances of tech translating to leisure time for the workers, the top execs and CEO, everyone receives an equal share of the benefits of automation through labor laws and regulations on corporations and how they treat their workers as smaller share holders in the company. Everyone owns a piece if they're working for a company, it makes sense guys! I recommend people to at least research it and learn Bernie's full platform.
2
Yang is misrepresenting the point of a Federal Job's Guarantee. It's not about "giving everyone a federal job", it's about creating jobs where people want them, whether they're federal or giving funding through private firms, so that corporations are forced to begin to compete for labor and as a result wages go up. So many people mischaracterizing the point of this and not to mention it's a sub-program of his Green New Deal, something he proposes to tackle Climate Change first and foremost.
2
Yang is sort of mischaracterizing a job's guarantee though. It's not to "give everyone a federal job", it's to create jobs, whether they're federal or federally funded through private companies, which then forces large corporations to compete for labor and high wages that are determined by government regulations, this results in wage growth, something people are not acknowledging when talking about a job's guarantee.
2
Trump probably doesn't even know who Yang is. He's polling at 3-4%
2
@jacobiskandermusic Yang is abysmal on regulations and he's literally for protecting big tech from being broken up (even though they're expanding at an alarming rate). If you think it's "delusional" to question his pro-monopoly rhetoric and platform then you're not a serious person. He wants to put a sunset provision on all regulations, that should terrify any real progressive.
2
@eldritchpumpkinghost2968 Deregulation is a good way to ensure we have a Recession every few years, and it's why there is rampant stock buy backs going on right now that is inflating the market and winding us up for yet another Recession just as the sub-prime mortgage crisis did in 2008. No wonder you support Yang if you're in favor of anarcho-capitalism. You know who else agrees with deregulation of Wall Street? The Clintons. It's the reason why Bill Clinton got rid of FDR's Glass Steagall act, put into place after the Great Depression for obvious reasons. Third Way Democrats have agreed with Republicans on deregulation for the last 30 years because it directly has to do with the billions of dollars they take from Wall Street and the corruption going on at record levels today. On these issues, Yang is just another neoliberal centrist Democrat who believes in deregulation of the market and protecting monopolies and big tech from any type of reform or break up that would realistically incentivize small business and competition, not just billion dollar mergers that enhance crony Capitalism and corporate welfare.
2
I understand that Bernie didn't go into great detail when he initially talked to Krystal, but you're not only mischaracterizing a job's guarantee, but you're mischaracterizing his whole platform. Comparing UBI to simply a job's guarantee is a fake debate. Bernie's "version of UBI" is in the form of a universal basic standard rather than a universal basic income. He literally has this platform printed on Tshirts. "Healthcare for All, Education for All, Housing for All, Jobs for All, Justice for All". I don't know how you can ignore the full context of his platform. Calling his entire domestic policy a "job's guarantee" is entirely inaccurate. He proposes an Economic Bill of Rights ffs, a robust social safety net that lines up with the Scandinavian model. Bernie is only trying to make us more like Denmark, Norway or Finland. Finland has these basic necessities and that's why they were able to experiment with UBI, they're way ahead of us, which is why they're far more happy than the US.
1
Lukas Martin Navidad You're mischaracterizing his position. Bernie is for a basic standard, not just simply a job's guarantee. His platform is literally posted on a Tshirt "Healthcare for All, Education for All, Housing for All, Jobs for All, Justice for All". I'm tired of seeing Yang supporters mischaracterizing his platform. You're also doing it in the case of a job's guarantee, the point of which is to create jobs to make companies compete for labor and, in turn, raise wages. Haven't seen 1 single Yang supporter accurately represent any of these specifics.
1
@mellonman9299 Very real reasons to stay strong with Bernie. Yang has made it unclear whether he'd actually back Medicare for All, at one point he called himself a "Medicare for All public option proponent", this gives me about as much hope with him on Med4All as I have with Warren. Only person I'd consider voting for instead of Bernie is Tulsi and she's already falling out of the race. Bernie is the only one with the political courage and the political capital to actually get these laws passed. He has a massive grassroots support that will be used similar to the Labor Movement, he's the real deal and has been for decades.
1
@darthclide Democratic Socialism buddy, and this is the Scandinavian model, are you that scared of becoming more like Denmark which has a the highest happiness index in the world? Ffs, one of the only countries to even try to introduce UBI was Finland and that's because they're in such a good place with a vibrant social safety net that they felt comfortable experimenting with implementing it nationally.
1
How will people work when Yang claims a third of jobs will be automated? Bernie proposes to create more jobs to force companies to compete for labor and force wage growth. This is a long-term solution to have an economy where people are much more on even ground. Also, I would like to see a UBI in a Bernie administration, but I would want it to be funded by a capital gains, top marginal tax rate or estate tax and I would want it to be in addition to wage growth through a job's guarantee that is also a sub-program of his Green New Deal to tackle Climate Change.
1
@khanhdo3988 They absolutely can. The reason we're having so many issues with outsourcing and automation in the first place is because these corporations are allowed to merge and grow beyond what should be acceptable, which in turn just stunts competition in the market and lowers wages. You need to end corporate welfare (or use it to incentivize higher wages) and draft trade policy that is beneficial to American workers first and foremost. Make American companies buy American (for real not just the symbolic bullshit Trump does). These multi-billionaire corporations can weather it and it will only help long-term investment in America by revitalizing communities especially in Rust Belt states that truly need it. You do these types of things in addition to a job's guarantee program, whether the jobs are federal or federally funded through private industry, it doesn't matter as long as the government can set the wages. The creation of jobs will create a higher demand for labor in addition to companies being restricted or incentivized to buy and hire American and then you all of a sudden have higher wages, more competition, and communities that can be revitalized by job creation that currently do not have enough work to even sustain themselves. Once you get a real populist in office who is not a shill for big moneyed interests, many of these things can be done through executive orders even (such as the buy-American thing) and once they have the bully pulpit, they can push Congress and the Senate on their pro-worker agenda. Nobody on either side of the aisle is opposed to job creation. This is something that can absolutely be done and should be done.
1
@chopcooey The same thing can be pointed at UBI but even worse in that case. If 30% of the workforce is supposedly going to be automated that means some people WILL be unemployed when there is not enough work to go around in the current system. Say as a result, many many people will be solely relying on $12,000 a year to survive which is simply not a livable wage. WHY would we not even try to revitalize job growth (to new modern jobs rebuilding a Green infrastructure, tech and such) but settle with the idea that many people will just have to cope with being unemployed and $12,000 a year down the line. That sword cuts both ways and arguably the outcome is far worse in the scenario with UBI. In comparison, Bernie has put forward a bold proposal, the Workplace Democracy Act, that is massively pro-union pro-worker, incentivizes worker co-ops and more worker representation on company leadership in already existing corporations. This allows workers to have a say in IF their jobs get outsourced or replaced due to automation OR if they keep their jobs, keep their salaries, but end up just cutting all the employees' work days in half or a third. This is a long-term scenario where automation translates to leisure for ALL workers and top execs across the board and we don't have to worry about if $12,000 is a enough to sustain people because people will STILL have jobs in an economy that works for the many, not for the $500 million bonuses and benefits the CEOs receive from automation and outsourcing deals as they do now and STILL would within a yang administration as far as I can tell. Here is Bernie's Workplace Democracy Act, read up if you're really a Bernie supporter: https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/workplace-democracy-act-summary-?inline=file
1
@cjampz8704 You're missing his point entirely.
1
@FilipinoHODL "Bernie started a revolution, but his old ideas os not what we need, will even harm us" Wow, you managed to sound like CNN, MSNBC, and ABC all rolled into one. Amazin'
1
@calebhung7141 "Yangs plan is to create a public option that is significantly cheaper than privatized insurance. Why can’t public options compete with privatized healthcare????" Yang supporters are now literally arguing for a public option just like all the neoliberal centrists on the debate stage. This is too much guys. How are you people falling for this shit? If Yang is an "upgrade to Bernie" like you all are saying why is he effectively agreeing with the neoliberals like Joe Biden and Kamala on healthcare? It' the number 1 issue in America ffs.
1
@zackdarpinian9980 "I really wish I could reconcile my fears of Bernie's FJG". I don't understand why Yang supporters are fearmongering over a program that gives people the option to have a job and FJG is a sub-program of his Green New Deal, a proposal to boldly tackle the existential threat of Climate Change. It's ironic how Yang's supporters constantly invoke MLK for his brief support of UBI, but fail to acknowledge that a Job's Guarantee was a center-point of MLK's vision in that same work where he talks about UBI to a lesser extent. Many Yang supporters are saying silly things like "it makes us government slaves", when the point of a Job's Guarantee is to lower unemployment so private companies have to compete for labor and as a result, wages INCREASE. I haven't seen 1 single Yang Gang person accurately represent the issue of a Job's Guarantee, they just smear and fearmonger over it as a government takeover, when the whole long-term goal is to increase wages in the private sector, rebuild our infrastructure, create new Green infrastructure (you know, cause Climate Change is a tiny bit of a problem), and give good paying jobs for those who choose to take them (aka the "freedom of choice" I hear so much about these days, ironically being slandered as "slavery").
1
@Prague3203 Bernie never "championed UBI", that is false. Bernie has and always will be for a basic standard of living aka healthcare, education, housing, etc. This is how other European countries deal with basic needs, they provide a robust social safety net. In comparison, UBI is not currently done in any other country nationally. Finland had an experiment but decided not to implement it once they analyzed the results.
1
Bernie and Tulsi are both far better than Yang. I think his UBI is drafted in a regressive way when we have rampant levels of income inequality, he should be funding it by going directly after corporations and the rich. The only thing worse than funding UBI through a VAT tax is funding it through a sales tax. Yes, other European countries also have sales tax, but that doesn't make it correct, neither would be a VAT tax.
1
It's nice to see yang being polite towards the guy who revolutionized politics, but I do agree with others here that he's been mischaracterizing Bernie's positions, something I don't think Bernie did to him and definitely didn't deserve an aggressive attack from Yang in response (for simply not supporting UBI), which has only been amplified 100 times by some of his supporters. The truth is, Bernie is in a threeway race with Warren and Biden, attack him and we're more likely to get Warren or Biden, I don't agree with yang's passive aggressiveness towards Bernie, we should be going after the corporate Democrats, that's the whole reason Bernie hasn't been bashing on Tulsi, Yang or even Warren, he knows we can't let Biden, Buttigieg or Kamala win first and foremost.
1
Nice ripoff of #BernieBeatsTrump . what's next? #YangWouldHaveWon ?
1