SENATE BILL: Basic Income Guarantee (Law'd)

[Gass3268]

Nay

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aye, with significant reservations.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Abstain

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I count a 4-4-2 tie here with two days remaining.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This has thirty minutes left or so.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 56:48:

Aye (4): NC Yankee, Polnut, sbane and TJ in Cleve
Nay (4): Bore, Gass3268, MaxQue and TNF
Abstain (2): Hagridofthe Deep and Napoleon

With time having expired and a tied vote resulting, the VP shall break the tie.

[DemPGH]

Apologies - I meant to vote this morning but there is something called RL.

At any rate, I'm not crazy about it at all and am reluctant, but I think if we can do better it's probably not by much given how this vote went down, and we always risk it getting worse or just bogging down. I mean, it would be hard to keep food around with the amount of money we seem to be talking about.

An exceedingly reluctant and shaky Affirmative.

[Sec. of State Superique]

We could raise it to 10.000 rising until 20.000.... I'm just waiting for that Ammendment!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What now?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We could raise it to 10.000 rising until 20.000.... I'm just waiting for that Ammendment!

Wait is this a phase in of some kind or some kind of tiered levels of support. I am afraid I am not sure what you are referring to.

[Sec. of State Superique]

We could raise it to 10.000 rising until 20.000.... I'm just waiting for that Ammendment!

Wait is this a phase in of some kind or some kind of tiered levels of support. I am afraid I am not sure what you are referring to.

I'm saying that the Basic Income Guarantee initial level should be a $ 10.000,00 annualy, rather than the first $7.500,00 that I proposed. It seems to me that the current guarantee would not be as effective to substitute other social programs, although I'm just guessing and feeling that the $10.000 was the one that Nix was thinking about giving!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So what changes need to be made to effect that change?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Would it be asking to much to ask that list of steps or objectives remaining be posted as a means of hopefully providing some direction/interest here.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Too often on these things a point of disagreement is reached and the lack of understanding of the decision to be made or a failure to see what the whole picture is after each choice is made and thus inattention breads further inattention. That is surely the quickest route to the repeat of the Education bill and the small size is no means of preventing that.

Hopefully if people see the path ahead, they will be willing to consider the next step.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I cannot speak for other Senators, but $10,000 would probably be my high point range for I guess the "tax payer", as it is referred to in the text. I might go up to the 11,500 number that has been mentioned as the US defined poverty level.


Shouldn't we have a way of determining if the amounts different between the two members of the couple, who gets the higher amount. Like say maybe a determination based on who earns the most of the two perhaps?

 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Shouldn't we have a way of determining if the amounts different between the two members of the couple, who gets the higher amount. Like say maybe a determination based on who earns the most of the two perhaps?

I think it would be best to calculate the benefit for couples based on their combined income.

No, I was talking about the size given to each, like the present text gives:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

since the SoIA talked about having different amounts between the two, you would need a standard for determining who amongst the two would get the higher amount. Eligibility for and the overal level the household received would be based on combined income, as you say.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

First, now that we've adjusted the formula, we need to establish what GBI number a majority of Senators are willing to support. Maybe it's $7,500, or maybe it's something closer to the $12,500 that I suggest. The benefit for spouses or live-in partners doesn't necessarily need to be that high, although I don't want to disincentive marriage or cohabitation, both of which can be sensible steps to take if you want to lift yourself out of poverty.

Second, we need to discuss what kind of social programs should be unavailable for those who opt for the GBI instead (and I think that initiating this program with an opt-in provision is crucial). I've already named a few (e.g. SNAP, public housing benefits), which I'll cull together in a later post.

I am sorry, it was your post not the SoIA's.

I must be reading the bold wrong.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What were you intending to say, in that case?

[TNF]

I cannot speak for other Senators, but $10,000 would probably be my high point range for I guess the "tax payer", as it is referred to in the text. I might go up to the 11,500 number that has been mentioned as the US defined poverty level.


Shouldn't we have a way of determining if the amounts different between the two members of the couple, who gets the higher amount. Like say maybe a determination based on who earns the most of the two perhaps?

 

The U.S. defined poverty level, it should be noted, is calculated using a model created in the 1960s. It is not entirely accurate.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I cannot speak for other Senators, but $10,000 would probably be my high point range for I guess the "tax payer", as it is referred to in the text. I might go up to the 11,500 number that has been mentioned as the US defined poverty level.


Shouldn't we have a way of determining if the amounts different between the two members of the couple, who gets the higher amount. Like say maybe a determination based on who earns the most of the two perhaps?

The U.S. defined poverty level, it should be noted, is calculated using a model created in the 1960s. It is not entirely accurate.

Do you have an alternative measurement in mind, then?

[Sec. of State Superique]

I cannot speak for other Senators, but $10,000 would probably be my high point range for I guess the "tax payer", as it is referred to in the text. I might go up to the 11,500 number that has been mentioned as the US defined poverty level.


Shouldn't we have a way of determining if the amounts different between the two members of the couple, who gets the higher amount. Like say maybe a determination based on who earns the most of the two perhaps?

The U.S. defined poverty level, it should be noted, is calculated using a model created in the 1960s. It is not entirely accurate.

Do you have an alternative measurement in mind, then?

Don't forget we have universal healthcare!

[Napoleon]

Yeah we might need our own poverty line you know...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What would that be and how would it be calculated?

[TNF]

What would that be and how would it be calculated?

There are many formulas for calculating the poverty rate. We should agree on one and submit it to the GM.

TNF, what poverty measure would you prefer to use?

I would prefer we calculate poverty based on perhaps a four person household. So defining it more as a person making less than $22K a year, or thereabouts.