owning class... uses... lobbying
Civil right and liberation... has been,... including...
One is in the past, the other is present.
I am arguing for using lobbying as citizens.
owning class... uses... lobbying
Civil right and liberation... has been,... including...
One is in the past, the other is present.
I am arguing for using lobbying as citizens.
There is no horded wealth. If you hoard wealth, the Fed will print money until liquidity is restored. The only money that counts is the one in circulation.
Regular citizens circulate enough money to get UBI going.
There are other origins of power but votes are special because they control the law.
Which protests are not ignored?
All origins of power will align when citizens coordinate their votes before an election.
It's a bit Leninistic. If voting is a race among teams, a state is created that stands atop the citizens.
If citizens debate before the election about what they want and coordinate their votes, then the state represents their will.
Let's meet in the middle.
Have an open register among participants for who participates and how much they pay.
Then members are incentivized to increase the income of other members. You also have a pool of people for other projects like building cheap new housing.
I would like to believe in your approach but I don't believe in protests. That's transferring union tactics from companies to the state. It's valid in a monarchy but in a democracy, you can talk to other voters and have them support your cause. The citizens are the state.
Votes drive change. Believing in other means distracts from the real origin of power.
But votes have to be negotiated. Blindly voting for one's own team turns citizens into a product.
What's your point? I am not opposing UBI. I am arguing that we can have it right now if people want it.
People have tried to fly for centuries. The nonexistance proofs nothing. It just indicates that it is not easy.
Voting doesn't work because voters are like internet users, they are a given. Citizens have to offer their votes like lobbyists offer money to have an influence.
I see both desires, to have UBI and to lcontinue as is. I don't know which is stronger. I am writing these comments to find out.
Where has the debate happened? What was the result?
It's not just a matter of reversing power.
Billionaires lead. Regular citizens would massively have to change their lives if they want to change that.
Why strikes and mass protests? Vote accordingly and let the law drive the change.
Maybe because the people who hoard wealth are like everybody else and too few want to share? Why expect the billionaires to share if normal people don't share?
Right now is the first time in history since city state times that the citizens can talk and vote together.
If people choose to share their income, they can do it now. The debate hasn't happened yet.
A sign that you may learn something.
Jeff Bezos is rich but he cannot spend his wealth unless he is willing to give up control over Amazon. As long as he sticks to that power, his income is zero.
Similarly, if you have money in securities, no money flows.
So to finance UBI, the wages of the citizens are more important than the wealth of billionaires.
Thanks for the debate.