TFW we (burgers) will finally have a Yea Forums President by 2020

hi andy

Andrew "3 minutes" yang is a meme candidate. UBI is a terrible policy designed to buy people off instead of doing any meaningful redistribution.

so what's the next option? Trump again? Bernie? Democratic Puppet #20962694?

what are Yea Forums's picks for 'national read a book day'?

Don't believe him, I'm OP

It's way too authentic, middle class second generation azn bugman core

He's pretty based but would probably still be a disappointing president. Better than most at least

Attached: 1553895836009.jpg (1125x1962, 927K)

Bernie for being the least neoliberal. Warren for having similar policies despite still being blue-pilled about capital. Trump if the dems pick Biden or some other shithead.

>Trump if the dems pick Biden or some other shithead.
Agree

Yah caught me. AMA!
keep this a literature dedicated discussion, please.

We need a third party candidate if it's Trump vs Biden. Not enough memes otherwise.

/fa/ af

I love Marquez but I feel like 100 Years of Solitude has become popular mostly because of the political implications of a non-white author being accepted as a classic. It seems more like a signal to other leftists that this persons literary tastes are woke and less like just an appreciation for a great work. I certainly don’t see major political candidates talking about any other books as often.

>Smiths
>The Cure

/fa/? more like /fag/

>I love Marquez but I feel like 100 Years of Solitude has become popular mostly because of the political implications of a non-white author being accepted as a classic.
García Márquez*. And no the book was popular way before it was translated into English. You just think its merits lie in "muh political implications" because you're American and you see this kind meme politics everywhere. Even Borges called it "One of the best books of our times and any other time." Quality Latin American authors in general become known thanks to their writing, not for forced reasons like blacks in the US.

He doesn’t have the poor on his side either, they will actually lose benefits valued at more than 1000/month, so nigger immigrants with 10 kids will vote no. Yang would purely be a boon to us poor millennial men (not women who already get womenbux from men). He just has no base sadly.

Most poor people will hear UBI and be completely on board

>Marquez
>non-white
I hate Americans so goddamn much.

Not everything revolves around your shitty country's politics. Imagine being a dumb American thinking they're relevant.

hillary's favorite book was the brothers karamazov i believe

Interesting, here's Drumpf's
usnews.com/news/slideshows/10-books-donald-trump-loves
Does anyone know what based Nixon read?

I love hamburgers but I feel like the world would be a better place if every major metropolitan city in the USA was burned to the ground and the survivors forced into hard labour by their new Chinese masters

UBI paid for by taxing Amazon and Google through a VAT which the consumer has to pay and will negatively affect the poor the most.

How is he getting away with spouting completely bullshit like this? Has a single dem pointed this out yet?

Hhaha, The Prince.

He truly is the troll in chief.

>not picking Trump if they nominate Warren

Shaking my s m haych.

yangs favourite book

Attached: 38734.jpg (260x262, 22K)

Based. Je suis d'accord.

He can't win
If he wins, China will gloat so hard about Chinese people being the new dominant race and people will be too insulted to ever vote for him.
He stands as much chance as a Russian man does of winning the presidency

Should've been Crime and Punishment.

His UBI proposal is opt in I think. So you can choose to keep your current benefits if you prefer, if I'm remembering this right

Andrew Yang sux

You're right, but if you don't opt in and retain your old benefits you must pay a 10% 'value added' tax. This goes for everyone on some form of welfare, thus boomers 65+ will also be subjected to this tax as no one is giving up their social security for a measly 12k.

I have no idea why no one's been calling him out for this during the debates. His ideas seem great, until you actually read his policies. He'll do more damage to the precarious, if anything.

>Not everything revolves around your shitty country's politics. Imagine being a dumb American thinking they're relevant.
Imagine thinking any non-American countries matter. Americans don't even know what a world map looks like because they don't need to.

We don't have one clue what goes on around the world and you all live in our shadow

>Murakami
Based, you got my vote.

Vote for Trump anyway, if you're an accelerationist.

>Andrew yang will get more than 5% at most
OKAAY HAHHAHAHA

look at the betting markets

Tick tock America

t. Israeli client state

>Americans don't even know what a world map looks like because they don't need to.
Ignorance is our strength.

That’s a pretty based pick desu

The worlds top ten most liveable cities and none of them are cities in the US. Epic.

So important that Americans are being replaced in theirs own country

>has to pick a children's picturebook to appeal the lower class

Reddit.

Actually rich important people dont live in cities. Cities are for psueds

thanks for the Bump!

Yang is Bernie without the red flags

Why wouldn't the market adjust to everyone's 1k?

lol he really took to the 90s. such a way cool dude

Nixon wanted UBI and Boomers elected him with a landslide

because the market does not pay for the 1k, the consumer does, no need for it to adjust for the most part all it would mean is that some people would buy more and some less. Rental housing could see an increase caused by a shift in demand away from cheaper slums, but unlikely since consumerism is more fun.

Yeah, but there was no chance of such a thing getting through congress back then, probably no chance now either, but the ACA getting through makes it feel like a very real possibility to many.

>The Giving Tree by Shel Silverstein
This is some kind of Marxism-lite propaganda isn't it?

UBI was closer back then than now. It used to be Republicans supported UBI while most Democrats preferred specific social programs/agencies. Today UBI has no support.

80s, nothing 90s about that other than there were still a lot of people living in the previous decade in 92.

I like him but it's a fantasy as unlikely as getting a winning lotto ticket that he'll ever be president

I like him better than Warren or Biden but whoever wins, fuck Trump

President Trump's favorite movie is Citizen Kane.

>UBI was closer back then than now.
You missed the point, almost no one thought UBI would get through in the Nixon era, they were realists about it. It was just a little something about the man, this is the direction I would try and take the country. Now there is a sizeable chunk of the population that thinks it could happen soon. Nixon was not talking UBI every chance he got, it was far from a running point and he knew he would not have to face the ramifications of supporting it since it was not going to happen while he was in office.

It is really hard to reduce things back then to Republican and Democrat, both parties were far more politically diverse back then and congress was still more interested in their states politics than party politics.

I hate to admit it but Mayor Pete is by far the most Yea Forums candidate. Ulysses and The Odyssey are among his favorite books, he wrote his thesis on The Quiet American, he has a degree from Harvard and was awarded the Rhodes Scholarship which allowed him to earn a PPE degree from Oxford, and on top of all that he was an intelligence officer in the Navy Reserve. I don't know what he stands for, or if he stands for anything, but no other candidate's tastes come close to his.

Attached: image.jpg (678x381, 20K)

kino

He tried to get it passed multiple times and even had Milton Friedman shilling for UBI in support on public television. It wasn't as important to Nixon as international issues, which were always his fetish, but it was something he made a genuine effort towards.

Notice you had to name his favorite movie. That's because he doesn't read.

"Good guy, needs a better wife"

Carter and Lincoln were two of the most lit world leaders in recent history outside of the usual suspect diarist revolutionaries and manifesto writers.

I doubt it can happen because this is a gay earth but yang has my vote

>because the market does not pay for the 1k, the consumer does, no need for it to adjust for the most part all it would mean is that some people would buy more and some less. Rental housing could see an increase caused by a shift in demand away from cheaper slums, but unlikely since consumerism is more fun.

Handing out cash (although this isn't what Yang's policy would really do since it's even more retarded and bureaucratic than that) might not be inflationary at one point but highly inflationary at another based upon other more important variables. When you have lots of excess capacity to suck up the additional spending there's no problem but when that's not the case you're going to get inflation and the "tax payers" will revolt against the system. It's all very flawed conventional economic thinking, the neolibs want to impose sales taxes and other regressive measures to "fund" the UBI. It's just sidestepping the alternative of more of a direct state role in investment to "buy" up excess capacity whenever it's there but no private spending going on.

No it really wasn't. Some hack academic economists gave some support to the idea but it was never politically popular and especially not with republicans who hate freeloaders. There's more support than ever by extremely naive progressives who have no idea what their getting into.

>/fa/
>Yea Forums
>Yea Forums
>/hm/
not bad. i'd vote for that.

here's the thing: that kind of tax would award minimalist/anti-consumption lifestyles and be an additional tax on consumerist whores. that is beyond 97th dimensional chess.

>ppe
We call that the "piss poor at everything" degree because you don't study anything properly and come out as a radical centrist

shut up fag

Ya, real cool idea, I'm sure the plebs will love you

masongaffney.org/workpapers/WP084 Salestax Suicides Through History.pdf

>When you have lots of excess capacity to suck up the additional spending
That only applies if everyone keeps buying the same stuff just more of it, but the handful of experiments in UBI show that is not what happens, most everyone goes up as high as they can in quality, price wise. They maintain their current living standards but eat at Denny's instead of McDonalds and shop at JCPenny instead of Target, they blow it all on buying 'better' junk. Inflation ends up being pushed onto primarily the higher quality items, which will not really affect to many in the end. You can argue it either way, the only thing for certain is there will be inflation in some areas and others will remain stable. I suspect the effects on both the markets and standard of living will not really change much.

That is not really the thing, life already rewards such lifestyles, only thing that would change is there would be a small percentage of people who will jump through the required hoops to actually live solely off that 12k.

Ugly chink

>That only applies if everyone keeps buying the same stuff just more of it, but the handful of experiments in UBI show that is not what happens, most everyone goes up as high as they can in quality, price wise. They maintain their current living standards but eat at Denny's instead of McDonalds and shop at JCPenny instead of Target, they blow it all on buying 'better' junk. Inflation ends up being pushed onto primarily the higher quality items, which will not really affect to many in the end. You can argue it either way, the only thing for certain is there will be inflation in some areas and others will remain stable. I suspect the effects on both the markets and standard of living will not really change much.
There's no national "experiment" in implementing a UBI. Changes in the distribution of spending power will have effects like luxury producers who have the capacity to expand to replace lower end alternatives, this may be true but like I said up to a point and putting more spending power out there today won't be to inflationary because there exists a lot of excess capacity even today in America but that won't always be the case. It would be smarter to just employ any excess capacity and hire anyone the private sector won't instead for public investments with the governments fiat spending power, there's essentially no trade-off there. Inflation isn't just a monetary phenomena like Milton Friedman claims.