frostbiker

I don’t think there’s much of an argument for UBI to not be means-tested

That would make it a basic income, but not a universal basic income. Just to clarify the terms.

Something similar to what you are describing is called a negative income tax, in case you want to learn more about that.

Dude, they did it for an entire town in Manitoba for four years in the 1970s

The experiment did not apply to everybody in the village, but to a small subset of people.

none of the horrors some people seem to love to predict with respect to UBI ever materialized

The experiment did show a reduction in the number of hours worked in the house, as expected.

The experiment wasn't in any way self-sufficient. The funds came from the wider province, and thus the cascade of "fewer people working leading to a loss of tax revenue, making it harder to continue funding the UBI" couldn't have materialized.

This isn't idle speculation: this loss of revenue is the reason why the age at which people are eligible to receive a public pension has been increasing in developed countries.

Lastly, the experiment didn't attempt to measure inflation in the prices of goods and services provided in the village, so we can't tell whether it materialized or not.

How big and long-lasting would a pilot program have to be to convince you that yes, this does work?

I don't know. The specific concerns about the ramifications of a UBI and hasn't been addressed properly by any UBI advocates. I would like future pilot projects to be designed specifically to address them.

You imply that taking people out of the labour market is a bad thing, but how?

First, it decreases the production of goods and services, which leads to price increases.

Second, it decreases the tax base from which the UBI is funded in the first place. In other words, a UBI undermines itself.

I think that if they are charging them with that, it must mean it's an indictable offense according to our current laws. You can't charge somebody with being a poor Elvis impersonator, for example.

In the article they describe the charges for each of the accused and all of them are accused of what to me look like much more serious crimes, so at the end of the day I'm glad they caught them. It's just that specific charge which I find odd.

As ewww as that sounds, I don't get why the law sees that as an indictable offense. To my uneducated eyes it appears like a victimless crime.

Like, I wouldn't want people who work with children to read or write stuff like that, but given that we allow the publication of novels that talk about all sorts of crimes, why should this be any different?

So... eww but at the same time meh?

The carbon captured by the tree will be released when it eventually rots or burns. That's why it's called the "carbon cycle".

If you want to reduce carbon in our atmosphere, you need to capture and store that carbon in a way that won't be released again for thousands of years or more.

Around where I live the people wearing full face coverings appear to be middle aged Asian women trying to protect their skin from the summer heat. Way to mess with their goal of eternal youth.

How much of this is due to real estate costs? I'm both wondering about how much it costs to rent commercial real estate for a restaurant, as well as observing that if would-be customers are spending tons of their income just to have a place to sleep, then they have to cut down on non-essentials.

How about: change zoning laws to allow people to collectively decide what sort of housing they would like, and connect those places through complete streets that cater to multiple forms of transportation. Instead of the current suburban cookie-cutter approach of single family homes and car dependence.

Yup! I upvoted you. I'm on the fence on the subject, so I would like it to be properly investigated to find out what's actually going on in the DoD. Is it some sort of corruption, or something else? Why are so many high ranking people inside the DoD saying that these are not human craft? It's intriguing.

According to multiple journalists who have been covering this story over the years, the organizations in possession of recovered crafts have zero desire to let others study what they have. The whistleblowers in favor of disclosure are not the ones with the ability to "put up".

Want to see the craft? Contact your elected representatives to vote in favor of the UAP Disclosure Act embedded in this year's NDAA bill.

Maybe it will all turn out to be ordinary stuff, maybe not.