Comment by thatcat
10 years ago
Your explainations of capitalism being great for various countries were tangental to any analysis of BI in america. That capitalism reduced poverty is both obvious and unrelated to BI. No one is suggesting removing personal property rights. Think about BI like the banking and auto bailouts, inject cash in a dead spot to keep the economy stable using quantative easing.
I didn't and won't watch your video source. I dont think cs and economist are lying just that one has christian in the name which says somthing about their preexisting political bias and I'm not lying to anyone, the economist article was definitely a fluff peice which even the most highly credible media institutions can produce.
BI is a form of forcible redistribution that weakens private property rights, which is a key market institution, so pointing put that stronger market institutions are better for wealth-generation/poverty-reduction is absolutely relevant to the topic of what the expected outcome of instituting BI is.
Putting your head in the sand and being optimistic is not going to make the potential problems of forcible redistribution go away.
When the evidence suggests that a particular idea is a bad one, even if that idea seemed wonderful at first, a d even if that idea is wildly popular, it has to be discarded, for the sake of society.