Nick Hanauer on inequality

Interesting! Government(-backed) UBI is the ultimate goal. But how to make it happen? First, why has it not happened already? All the data indicate that it's good. A no-brainer, then? Well, - It's expensive - Governments vest financial power in businesses, not in themselves. End results? 1) A very oiled mechanism for income concentration, no questions asked 2) No mechanism for income distribution (!) 3) Blaming the government for not providing UBI already 4) No UBI, be it voluntary or government 5) Many people, who in fact want to contribute towards it, cannot. Why not start by creating that mechanism for income distribution, then? A quote about Sam Altman[1]: «Altman suggests researching Universal Basic Income. (Y Combinator has already begun work on a UBI project in Oakland.) “We should set a goal of eliminating poverty in the country,” Altman writes on his website. “I’m not yet sure what a reasonable timeframe for this goal is, but I do feel a moral obligation to figure out how to do it.” Unions aren’t working, Altman says, and wages are stagnant, so we need something better, even though he isn’t sure what that is yet.» Some examples of people who would like to contribute, yet cannot: - Nick Hanauer[2,3] - Letter for a wealth tax[4], not exactly on income but on wealth, yet indicative of the supply - The Giving Pledge[5] - Yusaku Maezawa[6] - Andrew Yang[7,8] has just brought together donors who are pledging millions for UBI - Patriotic Millionaires[9] - The World Economic

You really need to watch ▶ this video if you think that because corporations have to pay less in taxes that they will suddenly spend more on R&D and jobs.

He is not radical or left when seen from an EU view and with 20 years experience on Capitol Hill he knows exactly how the game is played. So he is able to get stuff done i have no doubt about that. Two of his main agenda points are no-brainers: - Medicare for all - Tuition Free College And he is right with his assessment that the rising inequality is not a good thing for our future. Two Youtube videos: link Talk with Bernie Sanders in 2014 where he goes on what it takes to change this system. ▶ this video Ted Talk from a Nick Hanauer on inequality

I watched the video after reading TED's response, and I'm skeptical of some of their claims, but I can also see why they didn't initially choose to publish it on their site. The video is at ▶ this video Since it's short, I'll go over it point-by-point. 1. "It is astounding how significantly one idea can shape a society and its policies. Consider this one: if taxes on the rich go up, job creation will go down. This idea is an article of faith for Republicans, and seldom challenged by Democrats, and has indeed shaped much of the economic landscape." The first line of his talk is a bit fluffy, but I don't see anything else here that isn't objectively true. Supply-side economics and increased benefits for the rich are a major part of the Republican platform, and because this idea has been accepted as true by society at large, it is not being directly challenged by the Democrats. (Who, arguably, want just as much to protect the interests of the rich & powerful as the Republicans do.) 2. "But sometimes the ideas that we are certain are true, are dead wrong. Consider that for thousands of years, humans believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. It's not, and an astronomer who still believed that it was, would do some pretty terrible astronomy. Likewise, a policymaker who believes that the rich are job creators and therefore should not be taxed, will do equally terrible policy." This is just bad rhetoric and bad logic, IMO. I get the point he's trying to make, but he's not ma

Released video. ▶ this video "This idea is an oracle of faith for republicans and seldom challenged by democrats." Clearly against bi-partisan and not pro-democrat. Very bad move by TED. Also, the quality of many TED presentations is a joke so they can't pull that card.