I’d love this program but I do think it’d make more sense to consolidate everything the government is paying for into one program with a much lower need for bureaucracy NIT also makes sure people who started working late or who are disabled get the same benefit they would’ve gotten working their entire lives. It seems more fair to me.
Unconstitutional!
1 Like
Maybe it’s time for a 2nd test
This is about 85% accurate yeah, it definitely gets a point across! I also see where you are coming from with flexibility, the problem in the US is laws are rarely changed after the fact and even more rarely changed back. I do think this policy would be a great stepping stone though
How exactly would it be abused? The only requirement is citizenship, unless you mean too many people would use it, in that case I’d mention that that’s the point. It makes sure everyone has a minimum but no one loses by making more income and getting out of poverty! I agree that the government should get out of our pockets and I think the best way to do that is cutting spending, this would drastically decrease federal expenditures while increasing the amount retirees are receiving
I do not care about stimulating the economy, the THEFT must end
1 Like
Money isn’t free! Taking money from some citizens who work so others can choose not to work is wrong!
2 Likes
Isn’t that what all taxes are? We gave out $2T more than we took in last year, the government has control over 30% of the economy
I’d like to say we could like in a tax less society but I don’t think that’s happen any time soon
Stop demanding free shit from your neighbors is a start.
2 Likes
Are you saying no one in America genuinely should receive money from the government? That seems drastic and politically suicidal. If you’re saying we should pay less in and get more out then this would lead to that, you’d also have your taxes go down with this policy
No individual should receive money from the government which is taken involuntarily from another citizen!
The only exception I might agree with is those who are unable to work due to physical or medical issues. These would require a case worker and basically be wards of the state, unable to support themselves, unable to have children, and the dollar amounts would be spent by the government not the individual.
1 Like
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is connected to Social Security, but it is technically a separate program with distinct funding and eligibility criteria. SSI is funded by general federal tax revenues, not Social Security payroll taxes.
Then we should completely close the government because I haven’t consented to paying for Roads, Social security, the military, hell I haven’t consented to paying the salaries of the officials that work there
Exactly, if you didn’t would you please vote for thr Proposal? Thanks & have a Blessed Day, Fred Walker
I Agree 100%, if you haven’t please vote for the for this Proposed Amendment. Thanks and have a Blessed Day, Fred Walker
Toby Yadon – I totally AGREE!
However, I’d add on one bit… I’d propose that those individuals first line of financial support come from charities… with government funds making up the difference.
AND… I’d want recipients held accountable for ALL of the government funds that they receive. NO supplemental funds when they’re spending money on non-essentials… such as subscribing to cable TV , premium streaming services, etc. UNLESS they fall into that category of of being unable to work due to physical or medical issues.
I don’t think it discourages people from working. I’d say if they dont want to work, then so be it. If they arent encouraged to get a job and raise their quality of living then the economic standards are failing to be enticing and appealing enough. It’s why I also say test the system first. We can always make a policy with provisions and requirments to get their base NIT. When people see a high quality of life when they work and build wealth, then they should naturally want to persue this path.
1 Like
This is true, remember $1,500 per month is still well below the poverty line. Any reasonable person would not choose I live like that
…
You’re trying to convince me, and you avoided a deeper discussion because of that. You also avoided talking about how you could improve the idea.
I don’t believe the plan you outline here would be an improvement, I think it would make things worse.
I recommend you examine your motivations for defending this idea, because they feel off to me.