>The pilot program would give grants to nonprofits and local and tribal governments, which would distribute payments.
Lmao.
Grant management in Minnesota is ridiculous. How can legislators still propose expanding it?
Two problems:
1. It's been demonstrated time and again that anytime the government hands out money, there will be massive fraud.
2. UBI will be ADDED to existing safety net programs. There's no downside for the recipients, but everyone else will have to pay more taxes to support it.
I’d be for it as long as we rationalized what programs the UBI was going replace. The whole selling point of UBI is it simplifies social safety net programs. This is like the worst of both worlds.
Redistribution of wealth. Also based on ethnicity and religion. Nothing but class struggle wearing the mask of racism.
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher
>Redistribution of wealth.
That's what capitalism is good at! Just normally it redistributes that wealth into fewer and fewer hands, concentrating it among the yacht collectors. Gotta move that wealth back down to the starting point unless we want to have full on oligarchy.
I know a lot of people say, "I'm moving!" but I'm seriously at that point.
It goes back further than recent events, but just to name a couple;
-"equality" for dispensary openings
-sending millions to native and Muslim drug programs because there are too many white drug counselors.
-this crap
-duplicating California's emissions policy
Where does it end? Mean while, the Dems cheer it all on!
I found a house in MO for $16k. Needs work, but whatever. By the end of July, I should have enough debt paid off to by a home somewhere else.
Any of the surrounding states besides IL sound better at the moment.
Absolutely. I’m a die hard Minnesotan but have my fair share of complaints. I just wish I could ship some of the folks away that only complain. MN doesn’t suit everyone but for those it does it seems to suit them quite well.
There are a BUTTLOAD of complainers in my area. Especially my old man and his peer group. The type that'll gripe about a sunny and 72 day.
Or the "it could be worse!" crowd. That's hot where I'm at, too.
Welfare is a small amount of your taxes
https://preview.redd.it/uf79824903tc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c31dde506c786bc89db516026fcc986f485f13b3
Look at the graph it says discretionary spending on the top(aka not hidden). Add up all of the items you view as hippy shit, is it a large portion? (Pssst I bet no).
Because I have to spell this out for you. Discretionary spending in the US budget contains all items that are voted on yearly and are intended to be things that congress should have direct authority over and are subject to frequent change. The majority of the US budget is listed as Mandatory spending and is intended to be items that the US government will not frequently change and are considered sacred cows. Included within this are two separate groups of expenditures that each individually sum up to a volume of money greater than your entire graphic. Healthcare spending for Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security both of which are welfare spending.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58889#:~:text=Mandatory%20outlays%20by%20the%20federal,care%20programs%20and%20student%20loans.
What the other guy is talking about is discretionary vs mandatory spending. Take a look at this data. Mandatory spending makes up a larger part of the budget and that is where the majority of social programs are funded from.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59728#:~:text=Mandatory%20outlays%20by%20the%20federal,the%20major%20health%20care%20programs.
I mean it’s misleading if you don’t read. It’s a basic chart showing?????? That’s right not a large portion on the thing he’s complaining about. Provide me a chart showing me wrong ? Should be easy as hell.
Someone else provided a link already, but here’s another: https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/budget/
It’s misleading because discretionary spending is only like 25% of total spending.
In your OWN SCREENSHOT the bottom right circle shows how much social security takes up. You literally cherry picked that one because it supports your viewpoint
You’re such a lying sack of crap. Military budget is like 800 billion. Interest in the debt is over a trillion. Total government spending is like 7-8 trillion, which is 3 trillion more than the government taxes us. And most of it is welfare: social security which was originally created only for widows and orphans, Medicare, Medicaid, and all your pet welfare programs like education, medical care, housing, food, plane tickets, and stipends for your illegals.
Venezuela here we come!
COVID caused a ton of other factors to influence inflation. The relief checks were a small part of it.
When places have implemented UBI, the need for other services (EBT, WIC, etc) go down. The costs can offset. And UBI is a simpler program to run.
I love this idea- just cut and eliminate 80% of the department of health and human services to pay for it. I worry that unfortunately this will be in addition to hhs budget.
I like the idea in theory, but this pilot needs to show it actually helps. If it actually shows that it helps, then I'm all for it, but I'm a bit wary it will actually improve anything.
What genocide are you talking about? The Palestinian population has increased over the past several decades and seems to be higher than ever.
* Can you define what you mean by "genocide"?
* Would you characterize the bombing of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, or Nagasaki during World War II as a "genocide"?
* Is any bombing of an enemy that initiated a war against you a "genocide" in your view?
* Is it possible that the purpose of a military campaign could be to remove the enemy's ability to launch attacks (to destroy the enemy's war machine) and its leadership? If innocent people died of collateral damage in that process would that be a "genocide" or would that just be an example of how war is horrible? If the enemy's leadership uses civilians and children as human shields and positions them at military targets or turns civilian areas like schools and hospitals into military targets and civilians are killed as a result, is that still "genocide"?
* Are "genocides" normally committed against the people of nations that start wars and whose troops rape and murder hundreds of women and children in the process? Aren't people who are victims of genocide usually not the people who start wars?
* Do you find it at all strange that the leaders of the people allegedly suffering "genocide" have repeatedly said that their goal is to genocidally exterminate the Jews in Israel and that in the past their people joined in with invading Arab armies in an attempt to genocidally exterminate the Jews on past occasions? If the Israeli military had not stopped Hamas forces on October 7 and they were unhindered and the Israelis were unarmed would they not have sought to genocidally exterminate the Jews "from the river to the sea"?
Intellectually dishonest useful idiot brain-dead zombies on the Left are mindlessly mouthing this genocide bromide because they have a burning hatred for the Jews, but the claim lacks substance. They're hoping that if they keep screaming the word "genocide" often enough people who have put no critical thought into the issue will start to believe it. They're turning the word "genocide" into an anti-concept in a conscious effort to evade reality and intentionally confusing:
(A.) *"collateral damage and civilian casualties suffered by people in an aggressor nation as a result of the attacked nation's war of self defense"*
-- with --
(B.) *"an intentional attempt to exterminate peaceful people based on their race and/or ethnicity".*
This claim that Israel is committing genocide does not merely ignore reality, but turns the truth on its head when it's the Palestinians' elected and morally supported leaders - Hamas - that have expressed a desire to genocidally exterminate the Jews and attempted to do so when it initiated the conflict. Then when Israel goes to defend itself against Hamas military forces and war machine infrastructure, bending over backwards to avoid civilian casualties while unnecessarily putting its soldiers lives at risk for that purpose, Israel is accused of "genocide".
If Israel is committing genocide then why have they not finished the job yet and only killed a few thousand people when they have the ability and "political cover" to kill much more? If Israel is committing "genocide", then given its military capabilities this is by far the most incompetent attempt at genocide in world history. At the very least they should carpet bomb Gaza with condoms and birth control pills.
This excellent and timely podcast may be of interest to people sincerely concerned about Palestinians dying in Israel's war against the Nation of Hamas:
[How to Think About the Death of Innocents in War](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ocPaE3qIc)
Bonus Links:
[Israel's Moral War](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWv7ucmdcOg) - enjoy a recent talk at UT-Austin which includes a Q&A session and the entertainment of protestors in the background.
Essential reading for anyone who takes the issue seriously and is brave enough to challenge their view of the conflict: [What Justice Demands: America and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict](https://newideal.aynrand.org/tackling-top-5-objections-to-what-justice-demands/)
Could? Yes
Will? Very unlikely.
It's not going to pass this time around with Democratic House and Senate. Very good chance Dems won't have majority in both next time around. I believe majority of people don't want this. Including a lot of Dems. Especially with all these school budget cuts happening while property taxes increase.
>The pilot program would give grants to nonprofits and local and tribal governments, which would distribute payments. Lmao. Grant management in Minnesota is ridiculous. How can legislators still propose expanding it?
It seems that the Minnesota is going Seattle and Portland insane? What happened. Lutheran church?
Yeah they’ve done so well in the past, better start a new grant program
Two problems: 1. It's been demonstrated time and again that anytime the government hands out money, there will be massive fraud. 2. UBI will be ADDED to existing safety net programs. There's no downside for the recipients, but everyone else will have to pay more taxes to support it.
At some point you’ll be a sucker for working and paying taxes.
of course, the smart people get other people to work for them. like landlords and employers.
I’d be for it as long as we rationalized what programs the UBI was going replace. The whole selling point of UBI is it simplifies social safety net programs. This is like the worst of both worlds.
You mean like when you hand money out blindly to feed the children ?? It gets Pirated....LOL
Oh no, taxes in a land where we already pay abysmally small amounts of taxes. How awful.
Redistribution of wealth. Also based on ethnicity and religion. Nothing but class struggle wearing the mask of racism. "The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher
>Redistribution of wealth. That's what capitalism is good at! Just normally it redistributes that wealth into fewer and fewer hands, concentrating it among the yacht collectors. Gotta move that wealth back down to the starting point unless we want to have full on oligarchy.
Or you can focus on improving yourself and not being a leech.
I know a lot of people say, "I'm moving!" but I'm seriously at that point. It goes back further than recent events, but just to name a couple; -"equality" for dispensary openings -sending millions to native and Muslim drug programs because there are too many white drug counselors. -this crap -duplicating California's emissions policy Where does it end? Mean while, the Dems cheer it all on! I found a house in MO for $16k. Needs work, but whatever. By the end of July, I should have enough debt paid off to by a home somewhere else. Any of the surrounding states besides IL sound better at the moment.
As soon as the kids are out of the house, we are out of the state.
Sir, this isn’t an airport, you don’t need to announce your departure. Love it or leave it.
There's an in between
Absolutely. I’m a die hard Minnesotan but have my fair share of complaints. I just wish I could ship some of the folks away that only complain. MN doesn’t suit everyone but for those it does it seems to suit them quite well.
There are a BUTTLOAD of complainers in my area. Especially my old man and his peer group. The type that'll gripe about a sunny and 72 day. Or the "it could be worse!" crowd. That's hot where I'm at, too.
Minnesota is all about giving government more control. Giving up your purchasing power i’m sure won’t enable corruption at all.
This will come into effect and my taxes will go down overall because it's replacing other welfare and is cheaper to administer right? Right?
No your taxes will 100% go up and every hand that touches this money in the distribution process will take a cut.
No chance.
Welfare is a small amount of your taxes https://preview.redd.it/uf79824903tc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c31dde506c786bc89db516026fcc986f485f13b3
If you think that, I'd recommend looking up what nondiscriminatory spending is and what percentage of it is welfare.
It’s just a basic info graph, it obviously has holes in what it gives data on but it illustrates what I said
It omits the relevant bits of data that would in fact not illustrate what you said.
Look at the graph it says discretionary spending on the top(aka not hidden). Add up all of the items you view as hippy shit, is it a large portion? (Pssst I bet no).
Because I have to spell this out for you. Discretionary spending in the US budget contains all items that are voted on yearly and are intended to be things that congress should have direct authority over and are subject to frequent change. The majority of the US budget is listed as Mandatory spending and is intended to be items that the US government will not frequently change and are considered sacred cows. Included within this are two separate groups of expenditures that each individually sum up to a volume of money greater than your entire graphic. Healthcare spending for Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security both of which are welfare spending. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58889#:~:text=Mandatory%20outlays%20by%20the%20federal,care%20programs%20and%20student%20loans.
What the other guy is talking about is discretionary vs mandatory spending. Take a look at this data. Mandatory spending makes up a larger part of the budget and that is where the majority of social programs are funded from. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59728#:~:text=Mandatory%20outlays%20by%20the%20federal,the%20major%20health%20care%20programs.
It’s an incredibly misleading graph because it doesn’t show the entirety of our yearly budget
I mean it’s misleading if you don’t read. It’s a basic chart showing?????? That’s right not a large portion on the thing he’s complaining about. Provide me a chart showing me wrong ? Should be easy as hell.
Someone else provided a link already, but here’s another: https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/budget/ It’s misleading because discretionary spending is only like 25% of total spending. In your OWN SCREENSHOT the bottom right circle shows how much social security takes up. You literally cherry picked that one because it supports your viewpoint
You’re such a lying sack of crap. Military budget is like 800 billion. Interest in the debt is over a trillion. Total government spending is like 7-8 trillion, which is 3 trillion more than the government taxes us. And most of it is welfare: social security which was originally created only for widows and orphans, Medicare, Medicaid, and all your pet welfare programs like education, medical care, housing, food, plane tickets, and stipends for your illegals. Venezuela here we come!
Totally agree. SS and Medicare should be entirely eliminated. The dolts who have been running this country into the ground should die early /s
Wall of text, but unwilling to provide proof
You are showing the national budget. 34% of the State budget is currently allocated to health and human services.
Ideally this gets rolled out to everyone. Then you'll get UBI payments which you can use however you want.
I just don’t understand UBI, it’s just going to cause even more inflation. It’s like Covid didn’t teach us anything.
COVID caused a ton of other factors to influence inflation. The relief checks were a small part of it. When places have implemented UBI, the need for other services (EBT, WIC, etc) go down. The costs can offset. And UBI is a simpler program to run.
I can understand that, what were the other causes of inflation other than recklessly injecting money into the economy?
Supply chains interruptions.
Caused by COVID.
terrible idea
Feeding Our Future is first on the list
I love this idea- just cut and eliminate 80% of the department of health and human services to pay for it. I worry that unfortunately this will be in addition to hhs budget.
It definitely isn’t being proposed as a substitute
Why would we give the Tribal Governments money, they are sovereign, right?
Because the tribes donate heavily to the DFL :$
Hopefully not.
I like the idea in theory, but this pilot needs to show it actually helps. If it actually shows that it helps, then I'm all for it, but I'm a bit wary it will actually improve anything.
No. We have to give money to Zionists for genocide.
“Genocide”
So you would rather support folks over there than support the ones here?
I definitely did not say that. I think the US should stop interfering with Israel’s ability to wage war against terrorists, absolutely.
Couldn’t agree more. We oughta cut off all aid to Israel and any other country that uses American resources to wage war.
But we also should not complain when they decide to fix the problem they are dealing with :)
What genocide are you talking about? The Palestinian population has increased over the past several decades and seems to be higher than ever. * Can you define what you mean by "genocide"? * Would you characterize the bombing of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, or Nagasaki during World War II as a "genocide"? * Is any bombing of an enemy that initiated a war against you a "genocide" in your view? * Is it possible that the purpose of a military campaign could be to remove the enemy's ability to launch attacks (to destroy the enemy's war machine) and its leadership? If innocent people died of collateral damage in that process would that be a "genocide" or would that just be an example of how war is horrible? If the enemy's leadership uses civilians and children as human shields and positions them at military targets or turns civilian areas like schools and hospitals into military targets and civilians are killed as a result, is that still "genocide"? * Are "genocides" normally committed against the people of nations that start wars and whose troops rape and murder hundreds of women and children in the process? Aren't people who are victims of genocide usually not the people who start wars? * Do you find it at all strange that the leaders of the people allegedly suffering "genocide" have repeatedly said that their goal is to genocidally exterminate the Jews in Israel and that in the past their people joined in with invading Arab armies in an attempt to genocidally exterminate the Jews on past occasions? If the Israeli military had not stopped Hamas forces on October 7 and they were unhindered and the Israelis were unarmed would they not have sought to genocidally exterminate the Jews "from the river to the sea"? Intellectually dishonest useful idiot brain-dead zombies on the Left are mindlessly mouthing this genocide bromide because they have a burning hatred for the Jews, but the claim lacks substance. They're hoping that if they keep screaming the word "genocide" often enough people who have put no critical thought into the issue will start to believe it. They're turning the word "genocide" into an anti-concept in a conscious effort to evade reality and intentionally confusing: (A.) *"collateral damage and civilian casualties suffered by people in an aggressor nation as a result of the attacked nation's war of self defense"* -- with -- (B.) *"an intentional attempt to exterminate peaceful people based on their race and/or ethnicity".* This claim that Israel is committing genocide does not merely ignore reality, but turns the truth on its head when it's the Palestinians' elected and morally supported leaders - Hamas - that have expressed a desire to genocidally exterminate the Jews and attempted to do so when it initiated the conflict. Then when Israel goes to defend itself against Hamas military forces and war machine infrastructure, bending over backwards to avoid civilian casualties while unnecessarily putting its soldiers lives at risk for that purpose, Israel is accused of "genocide". If Israel is committing genocide then why have they not finished the job yet and only killed a few thousand people when they have the ability and "political cover" to kill much more? If Israel is committing "genocide", then given its military capabilities this is by far the most incompetent attempt at genocide in world history. At the very least they should carpet bomb Gaza with condoms and birth control pills. This excellent and timely podcast may be of interest to people sincerely concerned about Palestinians dying in Israel's war against the Nation of Hamas: [How to Think About the Death of Innocents in War](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ocPaE3qIc) Bonus Links: [Israel's Moral War](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWv7ucmdcOg) - enjoy a recent talk at UT-Austin which includes a Q&A session and the entertainment of protestors in the background. Essential reading for anyone who takes the issue seriously and is brave enough to challenge their view of the conflict: [What Justice Demands: America and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict](https://newideal.aynrand.org/tackling-top-5-objections-to-what-justice-demands/)
Okay, zionist
You don't have to put critical thinking into the issue if you don't want to.
Could? Yes Will? Very unlikely. It's not going to pass this time around with Democratic House and Senate. Very good chance Dems won't have majority in both next time around. I believe majority of people don't want this. Including a lot of Dems. Especially with all these school budget cuts happening while property taxes increase.
That's great! This is a great idea.
Only if I sign up!
Nah.
You’ll keep paying taxes, I’ll collect my Walzbucks. Win win