|
just to elaborate about the 'easier' thing, a gmi is basically one policy (although inevitably a complicated one) wheras a truly effective job guarantee would mean a whole bunch of new policies and systems, in other words an expansion of the state on the scale of the new deal or greater. and thats ignoring the bigger issue of who decides what has what value and why, but I think thats already been addressed as for it being potentially used by the libertarian minded to gut other systems of welfare, as you allude to with hayek and friedman, I don't think there's any way for any (liberal democratic) society to prevent that possibility. but its not really any different from the idea of vouchers for healthcare or whatever, conservatives will always propose these things and people, once they've gotten used to having entitlements, will rage at the idea of losing them. Olga Gurlukovich has issued a correction as of 00:04 on May 6, 2017 |
#
¿
May 5, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 15:07 |
|
|
of course, the notion that people will resist losing established entitlements is being challenged right now with the obamacare repeal, so we'll see what happens with that.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
right, a big benefit of the simplicity of gmi, besides being 'easier' is that there are fewer avenues for exploitation, racist implementation etc.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 00:15
|
|