this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1631 points (98.3% liked)

Political Memes

5445 readers
3299 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

universal healthcare and basic income, paid with increase in the top 1%'s marginal tax rate, would solve a LOT of Americans problems.

[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fear of losing basic income is a great crime deterrent.

Are you going to steal from that gas station if you could lose your basic monthly check for 20+ years?

You think kids would drive drunk if you told them that if they were caught, they would lose their basic income for life? Most think it's a slap on the wrist, maybe some community service, IF they get caught.

[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

damn, now THAT'S a deterrent! Capital punishment? pfft. Losing your monthly living stipend? real shit.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Losing it for life is too drastic and isn't what any behavior specialist would suggest.

There needs to be a path to earn it back. For example, hours of community service based on the offense and that increase with each offense.

It would also want to incentivize future legislatures excluding people by targeting groups. The drug war and its imbalance towards treatment of minorities as an example.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Its not UBI if not everyone gets it. We don't have freedom unless everyone can vote, always.

[–] Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If I murder someone and lose basic income for say five years does it go up to ten years if I murder another person or could it be served concurrently?

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would expect you'd be in prison for at least five years so are you suggesting you've killed someone while in prison or that basic income is the only punishment?

In any case, I am not suggesting anything concrete here, just going forward with the thought experiment. Basic income first, then we can work on how to use it as a deterrence.

[–] Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

Oh, I was thinking of it as a replacement of the prison industry. So just let everyone remain free but just lose basic income instead. It interested me because I think I could do without the extra income, save the tax payers money, and accomplish some personal goals at the same time.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Y'all realize what you're describing is just a poor tax, right? Anyone with significantly higher income over base income would...just break the law anyway.

If we're talking using money to deter crimes, it needs to be a sliding scale. You're a millionaire and got a speeding ticket? That'll be $50,000.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Aw dang it, we are only allowed to use one punishment as a country so I guess you are right. Maybe we could like, lock the rich people that commit crimes in a small room with a bed and a toilet.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I guess you missed the if. The topic is literally regarding monetary related punishments. That does even remotely imply forgoing anything else.

[–] Doxatek@mander.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

That's along the lines of what I was thinking. Making care more available is good but still having to get financially destroyed for it potentially isn't a great incentive to use services