Day 232: Blame Welfare Recipients.. or Implement a Solution?

Think People On Food Stamps Are Eating More Lobster Than You? Think Again

Stories of SNAP recipients using benefits to buy shellfish and junk food abound.
"I have seen people purchasing filet mignons and crab legs with their EBT cards," Rick Bratten, a Missouri Republican who this year proposed prohibiting SNAP recipients from buying seafood or steak, told the Washington Post. "When I can't afford it on my pay, I don't want people on the taxpayer's dime to afford those kinds of foods either."

In Maine and Wisconsin, lawmakers are pushing legislation to restrict SNAP benefits to foods deemed healthy. The Wisconsin State Assembly approved legislation this week to ban junk food and also "crab, lobster, shrimp, or any other shellfish." The bill's sponsor cited "anecdotal and perceived abuses."


Frankly, I don't know how someone could really afford to regularly eat lobster on food stamps. You don't really get enough money to eat comfortably. I mean, sure, you could buy some lobster this week, and maybe go a bit hungry the next. But really, who cares? You can do that with your hard earned wages too if you want. But it really doesn't matter.

For those who would be concerned that individuals on food stamps are eating more luxuriously than you can on work wages, look – the problem of you not being able to afford expensive food on your wages is not caused by someone on food stamps buying lobster. Therefore, the solution is not contained in trying to prevent those on food stamps from buying lobster or what have you. That would actually likely have more of a negative effect. It would take much more bureaucratic oversight to impose stricter limitations on what can be bought with food stamps, requiring more government work, paid by your taxes.

Wages are low because the economy is low because nobody has any money to spend into the economy. It's a vicious cycle that just feeds itself and more and more we feel the squeeze. What boosts the economy is people having money to spend into the economy. At this point jobs can't be counted on to provide enough income to individuals and that's why we have a support system like food stamps. We have a lot of welfare programs in the U.S., taking up a lot of government resources because it is already divided into so many different programs to ensure that it's spent on certain things. So much added bureaucracy and tax money going into a lot of double-work, essentially, filling out and processing applications for each different program.

This is why I support the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal, because it proposes to simplify and streamline the welfare process by providing a basic income to those who need it, to be used to cover all one's primary needs. There doesn't need to be multiple programs with multiple application processes and reporting processes and so on, when it can be done from one platform. And there doesn't need to be restrictions on how/where it is spent. That can be up to the individual, as it is the best way for individuals to learn financial responsibility, by going through the consequences themselves, and studies have shown that when individuals are given the chance they do not generally make poor choices, as some would seem to imply or expect. Certainly deciding for individuals promotes dependency as it does not encourage or provide an opportunity for an individual to learn and develop self responsibility.

So let's make sure that we focus on the real problem and therefore the real solution, and not get caught up in a form of blame game and 'it's not fair' point, like 'if I can't have it then neither can they' I mean, how does that help anything at all? Rather, look at how do we go about creating that which we would like, for everyone, and realize that things don't have to be the way they are. We live in a world where there is plenty, we need to stop getting lost in blaming each other, and focus on bringing about the changes that will actually solve the problems we're experiencing.

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal

• The Living Income Blog
• Living Income Discussions on Google Hangout (Done Weekly)
• The Living Income Discussion Board
• Equal Life Foundation – Site

Related articles

• Day 552: Why Don't They Just Use Chicken?
• Childhood Memories Influence Your Current Tastes - Life Review
• Dysfunctional Governmental Food Department - Jamie Oliver Food Revolution Review - Day 384
• Day 685: Learning From Consumer Culture

Day 212: The Living Income Guaranteed Would Increase Minimum Wage for All Workers

So there is quite some movement lately going on in the U.S. in regards to raising the minimum wage to a 'living wage'. Thousands of low-paid fast food and retail workers have been walking out of their jobs calling for an increase to the minimum wage.

In this video from RT "Fast Food Fight: Thousands of low-paid workers take to US streets", a sign is held up which reads: “Worker's Rights are Human Rights” - and that's a very good point. Because the right to a decent living should be a guarantee for all human beings. It's basic human rights to have your needs met. It is not something that is just about or for 'workers' but for all human beings.

It really doesn't make sense to work away most of your life and yet not even make enough to have a decent living, or to have time to enjoy it.

On top of that, in this day and age with the technology we have, it doesn't require as much labor as we're putting in, to cover everyone's needs. Because, have a look, most of the labor we do, most of the jobs that are existing, aren't even related to needs. A vast majority of jobs are service jobs, which is essentially getting someone else to do something for you. Like cook a meal, or clean your house, or help you pick out a new outfit.

Here is a chart from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics showing annual labor force statistics around the world from 1970-2012, where you can see that the service industry ( the dark pink) has always been the largest type of employment and has been steadily increasing, compared to industry (light blue) and agriculture (dark blue).

With the technology we have, much of human labor that is done in manufacturing isn't necessary to be done by human labor, it just is because it's cheaper for companies than investing in expensive machinery, and people are desperate to be employed to make what money they can to try to survive and eke out an existence.

I suggest to watch the documentary “Will Work for Free” as it shows quite clearly the potential of what we're facing in terms of technology replacing human labor, which shouldn't actually be a problem, but should be something we utilize to make life easier and more enjoyable for all of us here. But we've got to first sort out the point of support for all beings regardless of whether you're employed or how much you're employed. There needs to be a minimum level of support that is equal to a decent living otherwise we have problems, such as massive poverty and suffering, like we already have because of this very point. You need a job to survive, and there simply aren't enough for everyone, nor do the vast majority of the jobs that do exist, pay enough to actually live effectively.

The Living Income Guaranteed is the solution to this, as it provides that basic support for all individuals no matter what, and calls for a minimum wage for those who work that is double the amount of the basic Living Income. So that no matter what situation you are in, employed, unemployed or underemployed, you would have support for all your basic needs. And if you work, you would receive at least double that, so that you can afford some luxury in your life, as proper compensation for your time and labor. Because it does not make mathematical sense to be working day in and day out, and still be living in poverty, while your labor provides massive profits going somewhere else.

We need this kind of solution and sooner than later, because this is becoming a bigger and bigger issue that is going to more and more pressure on individuals and businesses, which can be avoided by working out this solution for support together and make as smooth transition as possible, into a country where life is actually valued and not taken advantage of for the sake of profits. Change isn't going to come by putting pressure on businesses, since they go by what the laws dictate, and that's why we have to take political action, not rebellious action, if we want to see real results. Let your politicians know that you support a Living Income.

Related videos

Related articles

• Day 252: The Rich Be Cursed, The Rich Be Blessed
• Day 253: Living Income Guaranteed and Means Testing
• Day 254: Only for the Brave: Living Income Guaranteed and the End of Warfare
• Day 246: Green Economics - the Newest Fad?
• Living Income Guaranteed and Labor Unions
• Day 247: Only in a Broken System does Misery equal Profit
• Day 475: No Money? Well then you're an Invalid
• How These 5 Companies Will Ruin Their Employees' Thanksgivings This Year
• 
  

Day 204: Is Cheaper Always Better? Is There Any Consequence To Cheap Prices?

We’ve got an obsession with cheap prices, and it’s so ingrained in, we seem to hardly even be aware of it. But Walmart is an perfect example of this – where the whole premise is (supposed to be) cheap prices. I say supposed to be, because not all the prices are cheap, other items that we might not notice, are hiked up to essentially make up for the difference of the other products which are cheaper.

In this article about the ‘google glass’, 'Could Google Glass revive the high street? One third of Britons say they would use it to hunt for bargains (but admit they'd be embarrassed to wear it)', individuals said they would mostly use it to compare prices while shopping. To see if the product they’re looking to buy isn’t available cheaper somewhere else. Which is interesting that it’s never questioned – but how is it possible? To have the exact same product be different prices? What changed?

And this article about Amazon.com, 'Amazon accused of bullying small firms and inflating prices - the truth about the world's biggest retailer' exposes that Amazon’s prices aren’t always the cheapest, and showing the price wars that have occurred where companies will adopt price matching policies. Which again it’s not questioned why aren’t prices made the same in the first place? Stores were implementing these price matching or even undercutting methods, in order to get more customers to buy from their stores rather than just using their store as essentially a showroom to test out what they’ll buy for cheaper online.

This article, 'How “discounts” trick shoppers into buying stuff' exposes more how 'sales' and 'discount prices' aren't always what they seem and are used to manipulate individuals into buying more.
Basically, we’ve accepted the idea that ‘we want cheap prices’. And this seems to make sense because, for the majority of us, we have low wages. Wages that don’t afford us to be able to buy all the things that make life livable and comfortable and worthwhile. And therefore, we think we need to find everything as cheap as we possibly can.

However, we haven’t been looking at the big picture – what does all these low prices mean? Can we have low prices but have quality products as well? These products being sold for so cheap – how much do the workers that supply the labor get paid? Do they get paid less if the prices are marked down?

The thing is – by always seeking the cheap prices, we put companies in a position where they have to continuously compete to have the cheapest prices, and what this means is the sacrifice of the quality of the product, and also a cheapening of the labor, which means workers having to do more for less, and if you’ll notice, that is exactly what is going on at large, where jobs are paying less and less, despite inflation going up. Even though many wages have simply remained stagnant, you can actually say they have lowered, because there are less higher paying jobs available and more lower paying jobs, so overall you can say the wages have in fact lowered. And that is just here in the U.S. This is the same also abroad in many countries that have don’t even have the very limited protection of the labor laws that exists currently in the U.S, (which really don't afford much and are mostly to protect the interest of employers anyway).


What you see happening in the most abundant jobs which is for example retail and food service jobs that make up a high percentage of the bulk of jobs in the U.S., is that they are purposely understaffed as much as possible, which means that the employees that are there must work even harder, though this does not mean any increase in their remuneration.

So you have to work harder, for less, and the result is that as inflation goes up and wages stagnate or drop, you can buy less and less. And so you want the products to be cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and it will never end, because they can never be cheap enough, but the products become cheaper and cheaper, which means less effective, and so as your wages go down, so you can afford less, the quality of that which you can afford goes down and down, so we are now buying things that break very fast and must be replaced on a constant and regular basis. While, if you are one of the few who could afford much higher priced higher quality items, the items will last much longer and you will have to replace it much less, and in the end those with the money will have actually spent less, than those who must buy the cheaper inferior products and replace them over and over.


So you can see the vicious cycle that is in play – the more we want cheaper products, the more our wages and the value of our labor goes down, and therefore, the less we can afford to buy, and products have to get even cheaper, and even more degraded, which then devalues our labor even more, so – when would this end? Obviously you could see that it does not end. Until that is, when we reach the point that the products would become so inferior and we would be so poor that we would not bother to buy them, and then businesses will collapse, there’ll really be no jobs, and essentially the economy would have tanked.

Boy, who wants to live in that reality? Many already do today in countries whose economies have crashed, and those of us who have paid attention and noticed that and read the news stories to see what that would be like, know – we do not want to go down that road.

So, we’ve got to realize the ‘bigger-picture’, in the consequence we’re causing for ourselves by so extensively sticking to this ‘cheaper is better’ idea, because it is not actually so. Our quality of life goes down, the quality of the products we can buy goes down, and it’s a viscous cycle down and down. 

The way to get ourself out of this cycle is to have pricing required to be structured in such a way that all points of a products creation, as the labor that has gone into making it in all aspects of production, is properly accounted for, meaning that it is sufficient to cover costs and provide all labor involved adequate compensation enough to be able to afford a dignified and proper living, which means being able to afford quality products. To ensure effective pricing, the pricing should be disclosed as to what exactly is included in the price and how much, so that it is transparent and therefore easy for all to see exactly what we're paying for, and that effective remuneration is happening.

And this would lead to the result of all products being of the best quality, rather than of cheaper and cheaper quality, because we’ll be able to afford better quality, so we won’t put pressure on companies to be the cheapest, we can instead focus on the quality of products, and therefore the quality of our lives.

For a quality living with quality products and to stop the cheapening of our lives support the Living Income Guaranteed at http://basicincome.me

Related articles

• Day 241: Will Inflation be a Problem with Providing a Living Income Guaranteed?
• Day 244: Transforming Currency into Money with Living Income Guaranteed
• Day 197: Minimum Wage Falls Short - What Can We Do?
• Day 451: The Tap Planned Obsolescence within Basic Income Guaranteed
• Day 456: Inflation and the Living Income Guaranteed
• Let's Face It, Most of Us Love Cheap Clothes -- and Don't Think Much About Whether Child Slave...
• Day 407: Givez me some Minimalism
• Day 460: Transhumanism: the Rise of the Machine - Part 1

Day 197: Minimum Wage Falls Short - What Can We Do?

The minimum wage in Washington, the state in which I reside, is $9.19, yet studies have found that almost double that is what would be required for individuals to actually make ends meet.

 

 

Washington’s minimum wage falls short, report says

A single, unmarried worker in Washington state needs a wage of $16.13 an hour to make ends meet, according to an organization that studies the so-called living wage level around the country.

In fact, several states for which the actual living wage was calculated, would need more than double their current minimum wage standards.

 

How is it that we have a minimum wage, which is supposed to cover the minimum wage that is required to live, and yet – it doesn't. Are we really that bad at basic math? It is quite obvious that it's not enough, because if it really was enough, then we wouldn't have employed people who can't make ends meet. We wouldn't have people deciding to go with state assistance and not being employed because why bother to work when you're still not going to have enough money and you're going to have to work all the time. This is why we have such a problem with welfare abuse, because employment isn't really much of a better deal.

Anyone who works a minimum wage job knows – it's not enough. Even if you have a wage that is a few dollars above the minimum wage, it's still not enough. This is quite a serious problem. I mean, who decided to make the minimum wage not be enough to live? And why did we let them hold a government position to make such a decision? Why do we go on day after day struggling and getting deeper in debt. It's like we forgot that the law system is supposed to Serve us, not Enslave us.

More from the article above, which I definitely suggest you read the whole thing:
Gail Hammer, an assistant professor at Gonzaga University School of Law who specializes in poverty and family law, said the minimum wage would be close to $16 if it had been allowed to rise with inflation over the years.
People working for less often struggle with housing, health care, food, transportation and even legal problems, she said. Low-income workers may develop an attitude that the system isn’t fair, which undermines social structure.
“I don’t think keeping people in poverty makes any sense at all,” Hammer said.

Many of us have experienced this reality, where you have to choose between which bills to pay, or have to forgo necessary health care due to lack of money, which eventually leads to even more extensive problems when things are left untreated. As the situation worsens, more and more will face this reality as well. How bad does it have to get, how many have to be suffering, before we'll realize there's a problem and correct it.

We have a tendency to not fix something until it really breaks. You hear a strange noise coming from your car (if you can afford one) and you tell yourself 'ah it's probably nothing' and make excuses and you let it go, and it's not until some part actually falls off your car or it stops working completely, that you realize 'ok, now I really have to take it to the shop and get it fixed'. And now it is really a mess and it's probably going to cost a lot more to fix it, and maybe even it is just too damaged that it cannot even be fixed. And we could have saved ourself a lot of consequence if we'd just tended to it when we first noticed the signs of a potential problem.

Well I would say we are well beyond the first signs of a problem as the signs are all around us and are in almost every single one of our daily lives, affecting each one of our lives, our children's lives, and will affect their children's lives, should they decide to even have any in a world that isn't going to effectively support them but may just throw them into poverty and a life of enslavement. And we really don't want to get to the point where things really collapse, as then it will likely be too late to do much about it as we'll be really taken to an extreme level of struggling to survive that you don't even want to imagine.

So, we're all aware of the problem, so – what do we Do about it?

Clearly we need to correct the law which is supposed to Serve and Support us to Actually Do So. We need to set the minimum wage to that which would afford a dignified life where one would have all your needs met, and have enough to do what one would like to do in life as well, because we are not working just to survive. There is no point to that. What are we just lifeless batteries to power the profit machine until we're used up and replaced? Or are we working and creating value through our labor which means we should be living lives of value.

One proposal that stipulates an effective minimum wage, is the Basic Income Guaranteed. This is not the same as the Basic Income Grant which has the same anacronym (BIG), but has different principles. In the Basic Income Guaranteed there are two forms of incomes, one which is a Basic Income which one receive when not working, which is like welfare, but it would actually be an amount that is sufficient to cover all one's basic needs, which includes things like proper housing and healthcare. 

The second type of income is a Minimum Wage which is suggested to be double the Basic Income, so that it provides enough for the luxuries of life. This way, no matter what your situation, every individual would be supported to live effectively, and those who would like to work to have more will actually get more from working. Work would be worthwhile, and not something done out of force out of the desperate need to survive, which ends up with people doing jobs they'd really rather not in conditions that are not preferable to abusive, where the worker has no choice because it's really a matter of life or death. 

The Basic Income Guaranteed would remove the survival threat from the situation so that we can make decisions freely for once as to what we'd like to do. Therefore, I definitely suggest to investigate this movement and support it's implementation on a local and national level, because we deserve a proper life and it's time we stand up for our worth and value ourselves, and not accept any less.