But what would you base it on? Would everyone get the same amount regardless of the local cost of living? Those covid relief funds were nice, but they didn't go nearly as far in Cali as they did in Nebraska.we need guaranteed income.
I would like to see a baseline enough to secure stable housing and food for every American citizen.But what would you base it on? Would everyone get the same amount regardless of the local cost of living? Those covid relief funds were nice, but they didn't go nearly as far in Cali as they did in Nebraska.
i don't know. i throw out the idea and we discuss. that part seems to be going fine. see? we can agree already, right from step 1.But what would you base it on? Would everyone get the same amount regardless of the local cost of living? Those covid relief funds were nice, but they didn't go nearly as far in Cali as they did in Nebraska.
i don't know. i throw out the idea and we discuss. that part seems to be going fine. see? we can agree already, right from step 1.
OK, so where I live in Cali, that baseline would be $2000 per person per month. Does that mean folks in Oklahoma would also get $2000, even though it would go more than twice as far in that state?I would like to see a baseline enough to secure stable housing and food for every American citizen.
I would also like to see a federal job matching program to help people relocate across the nation into new careers.
it should be based on each state contribution to the GDP.....California leads the nationOK, so where I live in Cali, that baseline would be $2000 per person per month. Does that mean folks in Oklahoma would also get $2000, even though it would go more than twice as far in that state?
I get that. Honestly I'm on the fence about the idea. On the one hand, a lot of people (especially in hella-expensive California) need a helping hand, however at the same time I get tired of tripping over homeless folks, and frankly I'm not sure that putting a grand in their pocket will necessarily go towards rent and food, more likely meth. I think the real solution is creating affordable housing.I get the desire for it, but it's a terrible idea, imo. Once you create a dependency, it can never go down and only goes up. The last thing this dysfunctional relationship needs is another baby.
Per capita, or total? California also has the largest population, so total state contribution to the GDP would be a bit skewed.it should be based on each state contribution to the GDP.....California leads the nation
The rental is okay though, that's just capitalism at work. If lower income earners can't afford it, hopefully they move and leave the area without any blue collar labor, then the problem sorts itself out. Problem is, people fight really hard to stay in an area they can't afford and expect subsidizing to fill the gaps, but that's stupid. That's like building an artificial river from northern california to southern california, forcing things to be how they're not supposed to be.I get that. Honestly I'm on the fence about the idea. On the one hand, a lot of people (especially in hella-expensive California) need a helping hand, however at the same time I get tired of tripping over homeless folks, and frankly I'm not sure that putting a grand in their pocket will necessarily go towards rent and food, more likely meth. I think the real solution is creating affordable housing.
This is literally the cheapest rental in my entire county right now on Zillow, a 1-bedroom in not a great part of town for $1900/month, no pets allowed: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/88-College-Rd-A-Watsonville-CA-95076/2070450162_zpid/
Two-bedrooms are in the $2500 to $3500 per month range. Here's a nice 2-bedroom shithole for $3600/month, if you wanna be a few blocks from the beach: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/300-5th-Ave-Santa-Cruz-CA-95062/16125160_zpid/
so cali supports the largest population of contributors to the GDP.....the goat farmers in South Dakota better up their gamePer capita, or total? California also has the largest population, so total state contribution to the GDP would be a bit skewed.
Well in my area, it's not quite that simple. A lot of people live here and commute an hour to jobs in Silicon Valley. We also have a strong tourist economy, which requires a lot of low paying jobs. How are people who work$14/hr jobs supposed to be able to afford $2000/month for a 1-br apartment? I know, they should just get a room in a house with other people.. Problem is there you're still looking at around $1400/month, so those folks need to work 100-hours a month just to pay rent. Thank god I own my home, and my mortgage is fixed.The rental is okay though, that's just capitalism at work. If lower income earners can't afford it, hopefully they move and leave the area without any blue collar labor, then the problem sorts itself out. Problem is, people fight really hard to stay in an area they can't afford and expect subsidizing to fill the gaps, but that's stupid. That's like building an artificial river from northern california to southern california, forcing things to be how they're not supposed to be.
maybe we should pay workers a living wage.....it's just a thoughtWell in my area, it's not quite that simple. A lot of people live here and commute an hour to jobs in Silicon Valley. We also have a strong tourist economy, which requires a lot of low paying jobs. How are people who work$14/hr jobs supposed to be able to afford $2000/month for a 1-br apartment? I know, they should just get a room in a house with other people.. Problem is there you're still looking at around $1400/month, so those folks need to work 100-hours a month just to pay rent. Thank god I own my home, and my mortgage is fixed.
I like the idea, but good luck convincing business owners.maybe we should pay workers a living wage.....it's just a thought
I like the idea, but good luck convincingbusiness ownersRepublicans.
FTFY
Convincing business owners is unnecessary.I like the idea, but good luck convincing business owners.
There are plenty of Dems who pay horrible wages round these parts.FTFY
You think so eh? Like Chamber of Commerces don't have any political sway? I guess we just need to convince Newsom? The state minimum wage needs a 50% increase in order for to be a living wage.Convincing business owners is unnecessary.
The word convincing is the problem.There are plenty of Dems who pay horrible wages round these parts.
You think so eh? Like Chamber of Commerces don't have any political sway? I guess we just need to convince Newsom? The state minimum wage needs a 50% increase in order for to be a living wage.
Why would it be necessary when they could just get the housing and food supplied to them?OK, so where I live in Cali, that baseline would be $2000 per person per month. Does that mean folks in Oklahoma would also get $2000, even though it would go more than twice as far in that state?
This has been debunked.I get the desire for it, but it's a terrible idea, imo. Once you create a dependency, it can never go down and only goes up. The last thing this dysfunctional relationship needs is another baby.
You're the one who said this, not me, so perhaps you should answer your own question:Why would it be necessary when they could just get the housing and food supplied to them?
I would like to see a baseline enough to secure stable housing and food for every American citizen.
I would also like to see a federal job matching program to help people relocate across the nation into new careers.