Is A Guaranteed Minimum Income Next?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
a year and a half go, I wrote of my concern that the Obama
Administration would soon seek a guaranteed minimum income for every
American. As we have watched the the unemployment benefits extended and
extended and extended again and again, one must wonder if, in the end,
that isn't exactly where we are headed. My concern has not slacked one
Below is the article, shortened a bit. I hope you find it informative and enlightening. ... JDL
the Obama Administration and his fellow Socialist/Marxist/Progressives
(who camouflage themselves as democrats) in the US government aren't
sent packing in November, I fully expect the next step in securing a
socialist state in America is a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for
Think about it. It is one of the few steps
remaining that would solidify the hold government has on every man,
woman, and child in America.
We know from the records that the
welfare rolls have increased exponentially under Obama. Recently,
changes were made by Presidential Executive Order to redefine "work"
allowing even more applicants for welfare to be added to the welfare
rolls. Why? Could it be the Obama Administration is deliberately
attempting to "crash" the US welfare system? If so -- why?
I contend -- that is exactly what is happening.
I an correct, then we are actually seeing the "Cloward-Piven Strategy"
at work. We are observing the foundation, the groundwork -- if you will
-- for establishing a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for American
citizens. It is very, very, worrisome. But -- it is only the latest move
by our socialist leaders to break America so they can re-mold her in
the image of their choosing, which is, unarguably a socialist/Marxist
is in a death spiral, dear reader. If the American electorate doesn't
shake itself out of this stupor in which it is currently wallowing and
come out swinging like the people we like to think we are, we are going
to lose our liberty, our individual freedom, and our country.
What we are talking about here is "a government-ensured guarantee that all citizens unconditionally receive an income sufficient to meet their basic needs." SOURCE: http://www.usbig.net/index.php
around you. Consider the extremely high percentage of Americans already
on what we call "Welfare" and consider, too, that nearly half of all
Americans currently receive some form of government monetary assistance
every month and then -- ask yourself what will happen to America's
economy if Americans are guaranteed an annual income whether they work
and contribute to our society or not.
Let's look a bit closer: What is a BIG? It is a Basic Income Guarantee.
"The basic income guarantee (BIG) is a government insured guarantee
that no citizen's income will fall below some minimal level for any
reason. All citizens would receive a BIG without means test or work
requirement. BIG is an efficient and effective solution to poverty that
preserves individual autonomy and work incentives while simplifying
government social policy. Some researchers estimate that a small BIG,
sufficient to cut the poverty rate in half could be financed without an
increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax
deductions aimed at maintaining incomes." SOURCE: http://www.usbig.net/index.php
Here's more: "The
Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is a government ensured guarantee that no
one's income will fall below the level necessary to meet their most
basic needs for any reason. As Bertrand Russell put it in 1918, "A
certain small income, sufficient for necessities, should be secured for
all, whether they work or not, and that a larger income should be given
to those who are willing to engage in some work which the community
recognizes as useful. On this basis we may build further." Thus, with
BIG no one is destitute but everyone has the positive incentive to work.
BIG is an efficient, effective, and equitable solution to poverty that
promotes individual freedom and leaves the beneficial aspects of a
market economy in place." SOURCE: http://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.phphttp://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.php
OK. So, how would we pay for it? Those who advocate the BIG say (above): "
... could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds
from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining
That's strange because just a bit lower on the page we find this: "The
most commonly cited source of revenue for BIG is the income tax. Most
proposals combine a basic income guarantee with a flat tax on income.
Charles Clark estimates that a flat income tax rate of less than 40%
would be enough to finance all current government spending and a BIG
large enough to eliminate poverty." SOURCE: http://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.php
I have to wonder if "less than 40%" means 39.99%?
How can I be so sure? Because the next attempt at a BIG for the US will
be only the latest iteration. The movement for a guaranteed income has
been around for a long time. A quick check for advocates of a guaranteed
income at Wikipedia brought some surprises. For Instance: American
revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated a basic income guarantee to all US citizens as compensation for "loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property" (Agrarian Justice, 1795).
French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine's sentiments and commented that 'man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth's produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence' (Herold, 1955).
1962, economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax coupled
with a flat tax in support of a guaranteed minimum income.
1963, Robert Theobald published the book Free Men and Free Markets, in
which he advocated a guaranteed minimum income (the origin of the modern
version of the phrase).
In 1966 the Cloward–Piven strategy
advocated "overloading" the US welfare system to force its collapse in
the hopes that it would be replaced by "a guaranteed annual income and
thus an end to poverty".
In his final book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote: "I
am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most
effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now
widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income."
—from the chapter titled "Where We Are Going".
1968, James Tobin, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith and another
1,200 economists signed a document calling for the US Congress to
introduce in that year a system of income guarantees and supplements.
1973, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote The Politics of a Guaranteed Income
in which he advocated the Guaranteed Minimum Income and discussed
Richard Nixon's GAI proposal.
We encourage you to read the article at Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income
are references to other advocates of a national guaranteed income in
the article at Wikipedia, but I think you get the idea.
while you are on the Wikipedia page, scroll down and check out the list
of suggested means of funding for a national guaranteed income. But -- be sure you are sitting down before you do.
A guaranteed income for all Americans is the worst idea for America since, well, Obamacare!
Item number two in the The Black Panther Party: Platform and Program includes the following statement: "We believe that the federal government is responsible and obligated to give every man employment or a guaranteed income." SOURCE: http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6445/
I mentioned above -- I have to wonder if the massive increase in the
number of Americans on Welfare under the Obama Administration is in
keeping with the Cloward–Piven strategy which suggests overloading the
US welfare system forcing it to collapse and setting the stage for a
guaranteed income for all Americans. You can read more on the
Cloward-Piven strategy at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward–Piven_strategy
I cannot even begin to tell you how deeply, deeply,
opposed to the entire idea of a guaranteed annual income for all
Americans I am. The American republic would be crushed and wiped out by
J. D. Longstreet