NO YANG BUCKS

>Also people with illegal/undeclared sources of income will also get the 1k.
Andrew Yang is introduced a VAT (a federal sales tax) to pay for the UBI though. So if you earned cash money under the table, you're still going to pay a 10% sales tax on certain things that you buy.

At any rate, wagecucks aren't going to have their UBI cut. Yang's UBI platform isn't means-tested welfare. It's a universal benefit. But if you are already on means-tested welfare, you can not double dip with UBI. If you get $1001/month in welfare benefits from the government, you don't get a UBI. If you get $500/month in welfare benefits, then you get a $500/month UBI to top you up to $1000.

No, you are wrong. Watch it again. It's given to every US citizen 18+ and people on welfare or social security need to choose between their governmental benefits or $1000 per month.

Attached: MIGAshill.webm (1280x730, 2.84M)

who u think u foolin glowie? fo real

Attached: 1552403105767.jpg (900x960, 49K)

>social security
Don't retired boomers get more than $1000/month in social security anyways? Heh. From my understanding, you have to pay into social security. You would have to be a retard to willingly accept less money when you already contributed to the social security pot all your adult life.

Which is why the boomer kikes won't get a single dime and be forced to pay the VAT!

Then it's unworkable and will never succeed. It rewards the leeches while, by comparison punishes most productive members of society, encouraging them to settle for the minimum and drop out of the workforce necessary to keep the whole thing going.

And yeah, I know that's apparently wrong. Which is not surprising because again, he would get no support by anyone but total retards if it'd be to work as OP claims.

this is the newest anti-yang shill tactic, just blatantly misrepresenting the most simple parts of Yang's platform and feigning ignorance

He just lost the black vote. They ain’t voting unless they getting extra gibs on top of gibs nigga

>punishes most productive members of society
rich people who just invest money that they inherited from daddy and sit back and collect passive income are productive members of society?

Hahahaha

Attached: 5F3C0189-35B3-4518-B9DD-5E7F5B6768A4.jpg (926x1024, 148K)

Unfortunately Yang is running for president of the United States of America and not as prime minister of Canada, you fucking numbskull.

The economy is powered by investment dumbass

um that's not true, op. 1000 goes to everyone except for welfare recipients. if a welfare recipient receives 700 in welfare he only gets 300

everyone gets 1000 including the rich. it wouldn't be universal if it didn't go to everyone

this is literally a lie, your government aid like foodstamps gets cut out of it, anyone no matter their income gets 1k

>The economy is powered by investment dumbass
The only difference between a rich trust fund kid and myself is that they have more capital to invest. If you are rich, you can literally live the NEET lifestyle just off the investment income that you collect every year.

>only those who don't earn anything will receive 1000$

Oh don't you worry. I can make that happen.

Erm sweetie, even Donald Trump will get the bag.

Unless you're already on existing welfare, in that case you have to pick between UBI or welfare.

youtube.com/watch?v=HR3bfxaNDLw

and thats a good thing, it will remove the people who dont want to work from the work force. Less shitty employees. Simple jobs will be able to start getting automated since its more effective anyway. Society will prospure.

Unfortuantely, yes, even in the case you mention it's by proxy. They may not produce much themselves but by investing their cash they fund businesses, personnel wages - they keep the machine spinning by providing work and the infrastructural basis for that work to be able to proceed.

if UBI gets passed i am not working ever again.

>but you can't make a living on 12k a year

i'll find a way. i'll live in a van or save up to buy a 20k house in some rural area

i'll still work but it will be to improve and benefit myself. it won't be to make an income.

I'll learn japanese, and do all the shit i haven't had time to do because of fucking wage slavery(which is a waste of time)

Attached: 1551648313060.jpg (1446x1920, 153K)

>and thats a good thing, it will remove the people who dont want to work from the work force. Less shitty employees. Simple jobs will be able to start getting automated since its more effective anyway. Society will prospure.
Exactly.
Someone at McDonald's fucked up my order and forgot to add caramel syrup to my fucking caramel latte. So all I had was just a latte. Fucking hell. I didn't drink my coffee until after I had got home and didn't feel like driving back to get them to add the syrup. lmao. Minimum wage cucks hate their job and do a terrible job. Robots would be far more efficient.

I buy thc distillate and make my own vape e juice and sell it to high school kids

thats not what he said at all. he said people who are already getting some sort of financial support for example 700$ of welfare, will only be getting an extra 300$. if you get zero welfare then you get the whole 1000. clean your fucking ears retard. and no im not pro yang, i just hate you fucking retards with the attention spans of gnats whose comprehension levels are TOILET.

There's nothing wrong with that. That rich kid's ancestors worked hard to get them that NEET lifestyle.

People who don't want to work and contribute should be left to die, their genes are defective and weak.

>t. retard
He said nothing about your own wages, just what the government already gives you.

>Unfortuantely, yes, even in the case you mention it's by proxy. They may not produce much themselves but by investing their cash they fund businesses, personnel wages - they keep the machine spinning by providing work and the infrastructural basis for that work to be able to proceed.
And how do you think the value of the rich trust fund kid's capital grows? By profiting off the backs of the labour that capital employs. Capital hordes all the value that labour creates. Capital is nothing without labour. Even if you only have a savings account, the wagecucks at the bank actually take your money at the bank and invest it behind the scenes. That's why the bank can afford to pay you interest (they take a healthy large cut for themselves of course).

Not always true, my grandma only gets about seven hundred or so through social security

You are clinically retared. Everyone gets 1000 dollars.

>30
>Haven't worked a day in my life

Attached: 5a7b0c1e557f3.jpg (907x1020, 126K)

And yet, that investment income, even if the person themselves is just lazy faggot, is what maintains job of the people maintaining and increasing the investment for said lazy faggot. Again, faggot in question qon't be possibly the most productive themselves, but their effect on the society, by proxy, through their cash, will be bigger and better than in case of pretty reliable, decent person who completely cuts themselves from financial interaction and has no capital that can be moved to keep the financial side of the society spinning.

I would think it's kinda obvious, and I say that as a rather poor person (certainly below average) who just lives humbly and keeps to myself - the fact that I find my lifestyle pleasant and pretty honest, doesn't mean I will lie that my input and effect on the functionality of a society is as great as that of a rich trustfund kid whose cash multiplies "itself" (pays wages of those who multiply it).

Except you can do that now. If you worked till you made $1000 a month, you have more than enough time to do what you want. I work two jobs and still find the time to learn 3d art as a hobby

>That rich kid's ancestors worked hard to get them that NEET lifestyle.
So if your parents were slaves and you're born into slavery, tough shit? Fucking LOL @ this life. There has to be a revolt against the wealthy at some point. We basically are put on this earth to serve them. While they sit back and collect passive income on their wealth.

>By profiting off the backs of the labour that capital employs. Capital hordes all the value that labour creates.
Yes. But it's not involuntary enslavement. People who manage the cash get paid.
>Capital is nothing without labour.
And the labour is worth nothing without capital that would make it effectively lead anywhere and without profit

Based

Attached: 7EC0242A-5EAC-4580-91A6-9D51B44820F4.jpg (720x814, 50K)

>should be left to die

That's silly, you honestly think people will just lay down and die. They'll just commit crime and get fed daily.

and that will happen over time, lazy people tend to not take care of them selves. they get fatter then those that care about working, they stay less educated because they dont strive to learn. They stay week because exersise is to much work.

The entire process will weed them out over a span of years. expecially the ones that dont breed.

but on the other hand we also may get some rare gems that use the free time of not working to devote themselves to higher learning and the arts, invent new inventions and write new novels. though this would obvioulsy be the minority.

wuuut. in his breakfast club interview he said it was either or. if you qualify for welfare, you can choose the welfare gibs or the ubi gibs. if you dont qualify for welfare, you get the ubi gibs regardless.

>But it's not involuntary enslavement.

>sell your labour to the owners of capital
>starve

that's voluntary?

>And the labour is worth nothing without capital that would make it effectively lead anywhere and without profit
Not if labour seizes that capital. Which is exactly what Karl Marx is commanding workers to do in the Communist Manifesto (not that I'm arguing for communism. But there has to be some sort of middle ground between rich families having essentially dynasties and a mass of peasants forced into slavery. Wagecucking is even worse than slavery. They at least had to feed, clothe and house the slaves. The wagecuck is forced to figure out how to do all that on his own with the wage he's given.

Why are you entitled to other people's money?

So if I only make $965 a month and don't get food stamps do I still get 1000 yang bucks or only 35?

Either A. you're disabled or otherwise haveto be supported by the government due to personal shortcomings in which case there's nothing to be proud of
or B. you've got lucky and live off the cash of others who funded your living, in which case, again, nothing to be proud of

Congrats of having it easy, I guess?

>Why are you entitled to other people's money?
Why are you entitled to me not putting a fucking gun to your head and taking your fucking shit faggot? Muh private property rights. Defend your property faggot. Fight me.

>so not 'universal' then?

I knew that chink was lying. All chinks lie. A chink only tells the truth as the money changes hands. And even there, don't think it will happen again.

Fuck, I hope UBI happens in the next 20 years. I am just too aspie/introverted to get/work/keep a front-line job.

Hardly any aspie-friendly back of house jobs exist now, what with cucked globalism and outsourcing. The only jobs left are ones that they can't outsource. FML.

The biggest problem with food stamps is that you cant use them to buy ciggies or android apps

The guy is about to debate Ben Shapiro about foreskins. There is no way he is going to be president of anything. Even if he somehow beats Ben, he's still the weirdo presidential hopeful who is obsessed with foreskins.

He's torpedoing his campaign. No one is getting Yangbux.

lol retard

ben shapiro defending circumcision will be cringe-worthy as fuck and he'll look like he's playing identity politics which he is supposed to be against

>Why are you entitled to me not putting a fucking gun to your head and taking your fucking shit faggot.

Nobody is stopping you. Go ahead, see what happens.

Who cares. Yang is done after this regardless.

OP is incorrect. you get 1000, unless you are on welfare. if on welfare and net benefits are less than 1000, you get the difference. if more than a thousand, you can choose to keep welfare or get off welfare and get 1000 dollars no strings attached. it encourages people to get off welfare since welfare is very highly monitored, so its more "free market" than welfare. 1 argument against is that with welfare we at least KNOW that these people HAVE to only spend it on food and housing, versus with this 1000 a month someone could just live on the street and spend it on booze, mcd, and drugs

>that's voluntary?
Yes. Because you're not forced to work for them in particular and you also have ways to live on your own, either by separating yourself from civilization (at the price of losing many of its boons and considerable danger), finding a work opportunity that you find fair and worth the effort (assuming you have rather reasonable expectations) or by working for yourself.

I am no one special. I am relatively poor in theory (and yet living comfortably) and I never had some really awesome start. But I am also not tied to any particular job and support myself in ways chosen by me. When I need cash, I find work - either move somewhere else in the country, get hired remotely for a bit or even work by myself for myself. I am in my thirties already and I manage to keep myself pretty alright, even if humble living but with many mundane marvels of civilized world.

Most people who resolve themselves to "slavery" do it exactly by their will - by resolving themselves to it. They won't move their asses to seek something more/else or they get fucked over by debts they incurred or desperately strive to maintain some proud standard of living they are simply not in situation to reasonably maintain. Everything comes at the price and they pay theirs - it's their choice.

At least in civilized world, if you're not simply a lazy faggot who is unwilling to learn any skills, improve, try new things and assuming you keep the drive to reach for stuff - you will carve yourself a living.

>print money
>give it to homeless and neets
>watch economy burn slowly, starting with drug and alcohol markets
Wow, amazing axelerashunizm.

After rent assistance, I survive on just over 2,500 a year; and it's less than 1,500 after bills. Hermitdom and frugality is a way of life for me.

>Nobody is stopping you. Go ahead, see what happens.
You're probably not rich so no point in trying to rob you. But you get my point? If you have a society with massive income inequality and you have poor people who have nothing to lose but their chains, they are going to feel motivated to commit crime. And people who have nothing to lose are far more dangerous than people who have a lot to lose. You would get REKT'd in a street fight with a BBC with nothing to lose. And Justin Trudeau is doing a good job of importing lots and lots of low-inhibition violent BBC and Muslim thugs into Canada coming here to culturally enrich us with their presence.

This is one of the best takes on modern life ive seen on the internet recently. So simple yet insightfully wise and elegant. UBI is still dope though and if we democratically vote it in none of what you said changes so I think its a good idea

Yang is just getting started. He's building recognition. Right now, hardly anyone knows who he is. Four months ago nobody knew him. He really blew up after the Joe Rogan interview. As of 5 days ago, he's officially supported by Nic Cage. In 5 months Yang will be huge.

Attached: 3281728.png (611x410, 45K)

WAGIE WAGIE

>If you have a society with massive income inequality and you have poor people who have nothing to lose

Also, tons of unpredictably violent homeless people who talk to themselves, shit on the street, leave infected needles lying around, and scare children.

Attached: 819237.png (605x441, 55K)

tfw I have been working since I was 13 (I lied on my first job application to say I was 14 back when it was possible to do that)
I have become 30 year old boomer

Attached: 1550464672298.gif (403x369, 167K)

>Not if labour seizes that capital.
And it often does. It's just not some retarded, naive dream of communists where those who got that capital and are the nucleus of the labour around it decide to just give it away to all the random faggots that come after them. No, they become the management, and they hire those others who didn't participate in the effort of throwing up the fundamentals but came afterwards - so those others can get profits by working to get their business profitable.

>But there has to be some sort of middle ground between rich families having essentially dynasties and a mass of peasants forced into slavery.
I refuse to believe Canada became such a huge shitshow that such middle ground doesn't exist there. You can start your own business, right? You can develop skills which you then, through own guts, intelligence, wit and effort can set up for hiring? You're on the internet, so I am pretty sure you can.

There's already plenty of the middle ground - working for yourself, working for an employer who respects and values your work so you're not just a 'wagecuck', as your trade of your work for the price it pays is fair. There's also quite some of government safety net in your country (certainly a shitload more of it than it is in mine!) you can supplement your meager income for the simplest of work with if you lack skills, talent, intelligence etc to make it on your own with something better.

Everything has pros and cons. If someone working really would think it's as bad or worse than slavery, then there'd be literally nothing keeping them back from finding something better in the field. Usually people shitting themselves over 'wagecucking' are disabled - often as emotionally as mentally or physically - NEETs who don't get any wage or passive tards who whine but are unwilling to drop their job for something else - because they aren't willing to risk it or gain qualifications for some other occupation.

Https://letsgetthisbag.com comon! It's like you aren't even trying

>Also, tons of unpredictably violent homeless people who talk to themselves, shit on the street, leave infected needles lying around, and scare children.

Yeah, that jusz sounds like a bunch of millenial retards who moved to leftshit states, work in tech sector and gets shafted by usual leftshit tax fees and living costs.

Give these homeless crack smokers $1000, and half of them will OD in the first month.

And if you still see any of them begging, you'll feel zero sympathy because you know that they blew their entire check on crack.

Attached: 21342902284.jpg (640x424, 58K)

>Give these homeless crack smokers $1000, and half of them will OD in the first month.
At least that money will circulate right back into the economy. Drug dealers have to pay rent, they gotta eat, etc.

only total losers are neets.
you "people" should be fucking culled

Go on and try, buddy

Attached: 147667273.jpg (960x639, 85K)

Same but 25

No disabilities or anything either

working is basically supporting niggers and immigrants who live off the system
we're better off not working to accelerate the collapse

>Improve yourself
>Learn Japanese

lol KYS

I don't think UBI is going to make it, and I don't want it either... but OP is lying.

Yang is going to give everyone from 18-64(I forgot the cutoff age, somewhere around there) 1k unconditional. It doesn't matter if you make a billion or 1 dollar a year.
Part of the way for funding this, he's going to cut some welfare programs. The core ones that remain will count against
your 1k total if you decide to take the 1k. So if you're receiving $500 in benefits, you can swap to UBI and get your 1k. If you receive
$1500 in welfare benefits, you can still swap to UBI for hard cash, but you will lose the $500 you would've had in benefits.

Regardless, I still think UBI is a bad idea.

He never said that dummy. He said even Jeff Bezos will get $1000. It's completely unconditional.