So those 73 who voted against Paul amendment are likely also making bank or otherwise benefitting from the USAID corruption, IRS should do something useful for a change and check those nay voters finances
What an odd system. Congress passes a spending bill and apparently never checks to see if it was acted on. But they have to periodically re-authorize the spending. Sounds like a lack of trust.
This, and so many other things in the past several months is why I have (generally) stopped commenting on substack. This kabuki theater of fiscal malfeasance that has become the norm for what amounts to a lifetime of many readers here has not, and will never stop, no matter how many articles, comments, emails or strongly worded letters are written, and no matter how many times Massie or Rand offer reasonable alternatives.
The old Alexander Solzhenitsyn quote about everyone knowing the lies applies, but at least he was finally released from the Gulags. In this day and age, nothing changes, the ratchet clicks the wrong way again, we bitch and complain, and then put our heads down and go back to our prole lives, just without the free Victory gin....
Sorry to be a black pill around our birthdays, but it seems to be the new norm.
Hell, my actual paycheck, the one I'm currently in the middle of trying to buy a house with, comes from these budgets, and *I'd* like to see a shutdown. Only make sure it's not used as a hammer on the public like normal.
So, yeah. They need to go real hard on the next one, and yes, let the fucking government shut down -- for months, if needed -- and make sure to publicize that they *have* a bill and it *will* pass, except they can't vote on it because the Democrats keep filibustering. Or just stay in session until whoever is doing the filibuster falls over dead. And let the body lie there until the next one either stops, or falls over themselves.
I'm a Canadian, so we don't have to go thru this faux "angst" about a govt shutdown every 6 months or so. That said, isn't a govt shutdown a GOOD THING?
It is when you're trying to cut spending, but as I mention in the article, all the money ends up going out anyway. Better for Congress to put on their Big Boy pants and do the job.
I suggest a trickle-up policy, for once. Cost, corporate profits would return to the sane profits they were earning back in 1979.
Universal Dividend Income (UDI)
A reason to present the UDI is to display why and how badly Gov & Capital has treated us while depending on our tax and public resources. Had wages followed productivity each of our wages and salaries would be double while corporations would still be profiting as they were in late 1970's and earlier.
The Dividend aspect direct us all to consider it like SS pensions, all our working lives we paid into it, FICA, and so it is earned and not some freebe charity whim of Washington, our grandfathers, fathers, mothers, brothers, .., and we have been supporting corporate businesses with free R&D results, public resources, and tax-paid resources. The profits of the Trillions we spent and still spend are given-away and have been for generations of our labor.
You and family under UDI may still work and perhaps invest the extra. Consider the small business created and-or expanded, as well as new capital in stock purchases. The 'investment' Class would expand - perhaps including nearly everyone.
Instead of UBI, we get Dividends for all the tax & public resources spent over generations in R&D and given to for profit corporations. Take a look and decide if a good idea.
Monthly 'Universal Dividend Income' calculation.
----------------
Detailed Description of the Universal Dividend Income Formula and Results
This formulation explores how the total income generated by wage suppression since 1979, along with government policies, could be redistributed to create a Universal Dividend Income for all legal adult citizens in the United States. We will examine the wage-productivity gap, capital policies, government programs, and how redistribution could result in monthly payouts for citizens.
1. Background: Wage Suppression and the Wage-Productivity Gap Since 1979
The period since 1979 has seen a separation between wage growth and productivity. Prior to this, wages and productivity had moved in tandem, meaning as productivity (the amount of goods or services a worker can produce in an hour) increased, so too did wages. However, since 1979, wages have failed to keep up with the rising productivity of workers.
1979 to 2024:
Productivity has increased by approximately 80.9% since 1979, meaning that the average worker today produces nearly 81% more than they did in 1979.
Wages, on the other hand, have only increased by around 29.4% during this time. This discrepancy between the growth in productivity and the stagnation of wages is a direct result of capital policies such as:
Deregulation and tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners.
The decline of unions, reducing workers' bargaining power.
The rise of financialization (e.g., stock buybacks, executive compensation) that focuses more on shareholder returns rather than reinvesting in labor or increasing wages.
This wage suppression—where profits have been funneled primarily to capital (business owners, executives, shareholders) instead of being shared with labor—has contributed to the wage-productivity gap, leaving millions of workers without the benefits of their own increased productivity.
2. Calculating the Wage Gap and Redistributing Capital Profits
To estimate the potential Universal Dividend Income, we need to look at the wage gap created by the productivity-wage divergence.
Median Wage vs. Hypothetical Wage (if wages had kept pace with productivity):
Median Hourly Wage in 1979 (in nominal dollars): $7.36
Adjusted for inflation to 2024 dollars: This equals approximately $22.00 to $23.00 per hour (based on the CPI).
Productivity Increase (1979 to 2024): Productivity has increased by 80.9%.
Hypothetical Median Wage (had wages kept pace with productivity): Hypothetical Median Wage = 22.00 × (1 + 0.809) = 22.00 × 1.809 = 39.80 per hour.
Actual Median Wage in 2024: Around $19.33 per hour.
Wage Difference: The difference between the hypothetical wage (if wages had kept pace with productivity) and the actual wage is: 39.80 - 19.33 = 20.47 per hour. For a full-time worker (approximately 173.2 hours per month): Monthly Wage Gap = 20.47 × 173.2 ≈ 3,543 per month.
Thus, each worker would theoretically have been earning an additional 3,543 per month had wages kept pace with productivity growth.
Redistribution of Capital Profits: The wage gap indicates that capital profits (from increased productivity) have not been fairly shared with labor. In this redistribution model, this increase would be shared among all 250 million legal adult citizens.
The wage increase per citizen per month can be calculated by: Monthly Redistribution per Adult = (250,000,000 × 3,543) / 333,000,000 ≈ 2,659 per adult per month.
Thus, 2,659 per month could be redistributed to each legal adult citizen, based on the wages they should have been earning had they been properly compensated for productivity growth.
3. Social Security, Welfare, and Other Government Payments
In addition to wage increases, the U.S. government provides various welfare programs, such as Social Security, food stamps, housing assistance, and Medicaid. These payments represent a significant source of income redistribution.
Total Annual Welfare Spending: The U.S. government spends approximately 3 trillion dollars per year on welfare programs.
Welfare Spending per Citizen: Annual Welfare Spending per Citizen = 3,000,000,000,000 / 333,000,000 ≈ 9,000 per citizen annually. Monthly Welfare Spending per Citizen = 9,000 / 12 ≈ 750 per citizen per month.
Thus, each citizen currently receives about 750 per month on average from welfare programs.
4. Combining the Two: The Universal Dividend Income
Now, let’s combine both the redistributed wage increase and the welfare payments:
Redistributed Wage Increase: 2,659 per adult per month.
Welfare and Social Security Payments: 750 per citizen per month.
Total monthly amount for each legal adult citizen would be: 2,659 + 750 = 3,409 per adult per month.
For Families with Children: Parents of dependent children would receive 1/3 of the adult amount for each child: 3,409 / 3 ≈ 1,136 per child per month.
5. Summary of Results: Universal Dividend Income
In this Universal Dividend Income model:
Adults (18+ years): Each legal adult citizen would receive around 3,409 per month.
Each Child: For each dependent child, parents would receive an additional 1,136 per month.
This model seeks to redistribute the income generated by increased productivity and the capital profits that have been hoarded since 1979, while also including welfare benefits into the equation. The result is a significant monthly payout that ensures more equitable distribution of wealth across all citizens, which could help combat rising inequality, provide a stronger safety net for families, and increase overall economic stability.
Conclusion:
The wage suppression since 1979—driven by capital policies and the decline of labor protections—has led to an economy where productivity has increased dramatically without a corresponding rise in worker wages. By redistributing the wage-productivity gap along with current welfare payments, the Universal Dividend Income model proposes a more equitable income distribution, offering 3,409 per month for each legal adult and a proportional amount for children. This would provide a substantial economic boost, particularly to low- and middle-income households, and could help restore economic stability and fairness.
In the decades before 1979 the corp. Production and Wage-increases ran parallel, then starting 1979 the wages went flat even though productivity continued to increase at same rate as before.
If you read the essay you see that had wages continued to be linked to productivity all wages would be twice what we have today.
By directing profits above that 1979 level to this, and adding in SS and FoodStamps the UEI monthly check for every adult as calculated, with about 1/3 for each child.
If you have more questions of objection - look over the write-up and they may be answered.
I’m not sure why you shared an essay as a comment, but aren’t you missing a very basic aspect of economics in merely focusing on the productivity/wage ratio? What about the productivity/price of goods ratio? You seem to have left that out of your calculations. If everyone were producing more, then you would expect that the relative worth of productivity would decrease, and you would have to correct for that at a minimum before you proceeded to make a case for any kind of policy.
I’ve been listening to Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell this week. I recommend it.
The assumption is that productivity is linked to profit - which seems reasonable, especially when you look at how wealth of owners took off like a rocket - while labor, blue collar and very much more the white collar, has stagnated.
If you have references to show the assumption of productivity-profit link is wrong, please post, if not then perhaps you can explain why such an assumption should be wrong with hand-waving.
Inflation is adjusted for. The assumption is that productivity is linked to profit - which seems reasonable, especially when you look at how wealth of owners took off like a rocket - while labor, blue collar and very much more the white collar, has stagnated.
In the decades before 1979 the corp. Production and Wage-increases ran parallel, then starting 1979 the wages went flat even though productivity continued to increase at same rate as before.
If you read the essay you see that had wages continued to be linked to productivity all wages would be twice what we have today.
Socialism/communism for Capital - with all our tax and public resources,
Capitalism crushing Boot for labor.
This is not welfare but Dividend for the generations of freebees our generations of labor-taxes and public resources invested. Since refusing reasonable wages to labor - a sin that cries to Heaven, then this system seems Just.
Sue, should I be surprised some would not argue using reason and logic but instead False-Witness. To bad that False-Witnessers aren't punished anymore, you and others would have forced virtue, better than none like now.
Update: Filibuster has been ended, Amendments being considered before the final vote.
Paul's amendment is up now.
The Paul amendment fails, 27-73. (LOL)
Next up is the CR bill itself, now only needing 51 votes (including Vance, if necessary) for passage.
Last edit: The CR has passed, 54-46.
So those 73 who voted against Paul amendment are likely also making bank or otherwise benefitting from the USAID corruption, IRS should do something useful for a change and check those nay voters finances
Text of the bill here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1968/text
You can see the point about how hard it is for the non-lawyer to understand just what all the sections and subsections and chapters really mean.
What? Nancy told them to listen to the women and vote NO. Guess Nancy’s losing her touch (along with her dentures).
What an odd system. Congress passes a spending bill and apparently never checks to see if it was acted on. But they have to periodically re-authorize the spending. Sounds like a lack of trust.
This, and so many other things in the past several months is why I have (generally) stopped commenting on substack. This kabuki theater of fiscal malfeasance that has become the norm for what amounts to a lifetime of many readers here has not, and will never stop, no matter how many articles, comments, emails or strongly worded letters are written, and no matter how many times Massie or Rand offer reasonable alternatives.
The old Alexander Solzhenitsyn quote about everyone knowing the lies applies, but at least he was finally released from the Gulags. In this day and age, nothing changes, the ratchet clicks the wrong way again, we bitch and complain, and then put our heads down and go back to our prole lives, just without the free Victory gin....
Sorry to be a black pill around our birthdays, but it seems to be the new norm.
Thanks for the astute coverage SC.
I'll go back to being quiet.
John. Yep
There's a reason this is called Screaming into the Void.....
Hell, my actual paycheck, the one I'm currently in the middle of trying to buy a house with, comes from these budgets, and *I'd* like to see a shutdown. Only make sure it's not used as a hammer on the public like normal.
So, yeah. They need to go real hard on the next one, and yes, let the fucking government shut down -- for months, if needed -- and make sure to publicize that they *have* a bill and it *will* pass, except they can't vote on it because the Democrats keep filibustering. Or just stay in session until whoever is doing the filibuster falls over dead. And let the body lie there until the next one either stops, or falls over themselves.
Happy Birthday!
Also, that is the most depressing video I've ever watched. fucking terrible.
... and Congress did it again.
Sorry for the all caps but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK ARE WE SPENDING $1,000,000,000,000 ON EVERY 100 DAYS?!!!!
Oh it's worse than that - that's just the spending we can't immediately pay for.
Is that the title of a blues song?
It should be
I'm a Canadian, so we don't have to go thru this faux "angst" about a govt shutdown every 6 months or so. That said, isn't a govt shutdown a GOOD THING?
It is when you're trying to cut spending, but as I mention in the article, all the money ends up going out anyway. Better for Congress to put on their Big Boy pants and do the job.
Smoke & mirrors. From one puppet show to the next puppet show. Keep your hands off my corrupt funders say the congress people.
Rand Paul spittin' into the wind.
I don’t watch CSPAN, does Hakeem Jeffries always sound like a barely literate person reading to someone who’s totally illiterate?
He sounds like he grew up trying to sound like Obama but doesn't have the brainpower to do it.
That was my take away. He was an Obama impersonator linguistically.
I suggest a trickle-up policy, for once. Cost, corporate profits would return to the sane profits they were earning back in 1979.
Universal Dividend Income (UDI)
A reason to present the UDI is to display why and how badly Gov & Capital has treated us while depending on our tax and public resources. Had wages followed productivity each of our wages and salaries would be double while corporations would still be profiting as they were in late 1970's and earlier.
The Dividend aspect direct us all to consider it like SS pensions, all our working lives we paid into it, FICA, and so it is earned and not some freebe charity whim of Washington, our grandfathers, fathers, mothers, brothers, .., and we have been supporting corporate businesses with free R&D results, public resources, and tax-paid resources. The profits of the Trillions we spent and still spend are given-away and have been for generations of our labor.
You and family under UDI may still work and perhaps invest the extra. Consider the small business created and-or expanded, as well as new capital in stock purchases. The 'investment' Class would expand - perhaps including nearly everyone.
Instead of UBI, we get Dividends for all the tax & public resources spent over generations in R&D and given to for profit corporations. Take a look and decide if a good idea.
Monthly 'Universal Dividend Income' calculation.
----------------
Detailed Description of the Universal Dividend Income Formula and Results
This formulation explores how the total income generated by wage suppression since 1979, along with government policies, could be redistributed to create a Universal Dividend Income for all legal adult citizens in the United States. We will examine the wage-productivity gap, capital policies, government programs, and how redistribution could result in monthly payouts for citizens.
1. Background: Wage Suppression and the Wage-Productivity Gap Since 1979
The period since 1979 has seen a separation between wage growth and productivity. Prior to this, wages and productivity had moved in tandem, meaning as productivity (the amount of goods or services a worker can produce in an hour) increased, so too did wages. However, since 1979, wages have failed to keep up with the rising productivity of workers.
1979 to 2024:
Productivity has increased by approximately 80.9% since 1979, meaning that the average worker today produces nearly 81% more than they did in 1979.
Wages, on the other hand, have only increased by around 29.4% during this time. This discrepancy between the growth in productivity and the stagnation of wages is a direct result of capital policies such as:
Deregulation and tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners.
The decline of unions, reducing workers' bargaining power.
The rise of financialization (e.g., stock buybacks, executive compensation) that focuses more on shareholder returns rather than reinvesting in labor or increasing wages.
This wage suppression—where profits have been funneled primarily to capital (business owners, executives, shareholders) instead of being shared with labor—has contributed to the wage-productivity gap, leaving millions of workers without the benefits of their own increased productivity.
2. Calculating the Wage Gap and Redistributing Capital Profits
To estimate the potential Universal Dividend Income, we need to look at the wage gap created by the productivity-wage divergence.
Median Wage vs. Hypothetical Wage (if wages had kept pace with productivity):
Median Hourly Wage in 1979 (in nominal dollars): $7.36
Adjusted for inflation to 2024 dollars: This equals approximately $22.00 to $23.00 per hour (based on the CPI).
Productivity Increase (1979 to 2024): Productivity has increased by 80.9%.
Hypothetical Median Wage (had wages kept pace with productivity): Hypothetical Median Wage = 22.00 × (1 + 0.809) = 22.00 × 1.809 = 39.80 per hour.
Actual Median Wage in 2024: Around $19.33 per hour.
Wage Difference: The difference between the hypothetical wage (if wages had kept pace with productivity) and the actual wage is: 39.80 - 19.33 = 20.47 per hour. For a full-time worker (approximately 173.2 hours per month): Monthly Wage Gap = 20.47 × 173.2 ≈ 3,543 per month.
Thus, each worker would theoretically have been earning an additional 3,543 per month had wages kept pace with productivity growth.
Redistribution of Capital Profits: The wage gap indicates that capital profits (from increased productivity) have not been fairly shared with labor. In this redistribution model, this increase would be shared among all 250 million legal adult citizens.
The wage increase per citizen per month can be calculated by: Monthly Redistribution per Adult = (250,000,000 × 3,543) / 333,000,000 ≈ 2,659 per adult per month.
Thus, 2,659 per month could be redistributed to each legal adult citizen, based on the wages they should have been earning had they been properly compensated for productivity growth.
3. Social Security, Welfare, and Other Government Payments
In addition to wage increases, the U.S. government provides various welfare programs, such as Social Security, food stamps, housing assistance, and Medicaid. These payments represent a significant source of income redistribution.
Total Annual Welfare Spending: The U.S. government spends approximately 3 trillion dollars per year on welfare programs.
Welfare Spending per Citizen: Annual Welfare Spending per Citizen = 3,000,000,000,000 / 333,000,000 ≈ 9,000 per citizen annually. Monthly Welfare Spending per Citizen = 9,000 / 12 ≈ 750 per citizen per month.
Thus, each citizen currently receives about 750 per month on average from welfare programs.
4. Combining the Two: The Universal Dividend Income
Now, let’s combine both the redistributed wage increase and the welfare payments:
Redistributed Wage Increase: 2,659 per adult per month.
Welfare and Social Security Payments: 750 per citizen per month.
Total monthly amount for each legal adult citizen would be: 2,659 + 750 = 3,409 per adult per month.
For Families with Children: Parents of dependent children would receive 1/3 of the adult amount for each child: 3,409 / 3 ≈ 1,136 per child per month.
5. Summary of Results: Universal Dividend Income
In this Universal Dividend Income model:
Adults (18+ years): Each legal adult citizen would receive around 3,409 per month.
Each Child: For each dependent child, parents would receive an additional 1,136 per month.
This model seeks to redistribute the income generated by increased productivity and the capital profits that have been hoarded since 1979, while also including welfare benefits into the equation. The result is a significant monthly payout that ensures more equitable distribution of wealth across all citizens, which could help combat rising inequality, provide a stronger safety net for families, and increase overall economic stability.
Conclusion:
The wage suppression since 1979—driven by capital policies and the decline of labor protections—has led to an economy where productivity has increased dramatically without a corresponding rise in worker wages. By redistributing the wage-productivity gap along with current welfare payments, the Universal Dividend Income model proposes a more equitable income distribution, offering 3,409 per month for each legal adult and a proportional amount for children. This would provide a substantial economic boost, particularly to low- and middle-income households, and could help restore economic stability and fairness.
Why pick 1979 as your arbitrary reset point? Your first hit on the bong?
In the decades before 1979 the corp. Production and Wage-increases ran parallel, then starting 1979 the wages went flat even though productivity continued to increase at same rate as before.
If you read the essay you see that had wages continued to be linked to productivity all wages would be twice what we have today.
By directing profits above that 1979 level to this, and adding in SS and FoodStamps the UEI monthly check for every adult as calculated, with about 1/3 for each child.
If you have more questions of objection - look over the write-up and they may be answered.
I’m not sure why you shared an essay as a comment, but aren’t you missing a very basic aspect of economics in merely focusing on the productivity/wage ratio? What about the productivity/price of goods ratio? You seem to have left that out of your calculations. If everyone were producing more, then you would expect that the relative worth of productivity would decrease, and you would have to correct for that at a minimum before you proceeded to make a case for any kind of policy.
I’ve been listening to Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell this week. I recommend it.
The assumption is that productivity is linked to profit - which seems reasonable, especially when you look at how wealth of owners took off like a rocket - while labor, blue collar and very much more the white collar, has stagnated.
If you have references to show the assumption of productivity-profit link is wrong, please post, if not then perhaps you can explain why such an assumption should be wrong with hand-waving.
You'll also note that (predictably) the productivity/wage ratio got out of whack when the money stopped being backed by anything tangible.
Inflation is adjusted for. The assumption is that productivity is linked to profit - which seems reasonable, especially when you look at how wealth of owners took off like a rocket - while labor, blue collar and very much more the white collar, has stagnated.
In the decades before 1979 the corp. Production and Wage-increases ran parallel, then starting 1979 the wages went flat even though productivity continued to increase at same rate as before.
If you read the essay you see that had wages continued to be linked to productivity all wages would be twice what we have today.
TL/DR. Skimmed thru it and no thanks, Commie.
Socialism/communism for Capital - with all our tax and public resources,
Capitalism crushing Boot for labor.
This is not welfare but Dividend for the generations of freebees our generations of labor-taxes and public resources invested. Since refusing reasonable wages to labor - a sin that cries to Heaven, then this system seems Just.
Sue, should I be surprised some would not argue using reason and logic but instead False-Witness. To bad that False-Witnessers aren't punished anymore, you and others would have forced virtue, better than none like now.
You just did what all Commies do.... stated that I should be punished because I don't agree with you.
Textbook commie tactics. How do you reconcile your belief in a Sky Fairy with your beliefs in socialism/communism?
Happy Birthday Sim Com! I hope it's a great one! 🎂🍨🍰🍧🧁🥂🍾🍷🍻🍸🍹🥃 Enjoy!
Thank you!
Happy birthday SimCom! Pi day, on the cusp of opening day. A good day for a birthday 🎂
Or, birthday pie! A square one of course.
Plus Einstein's birthday! (Also Kirby Puckett!)
And to think my birthday is only shared with Bobby Orr...
🥳 Happy Birthday!
Thank you!!
Another fellow Piscean - no wonder you can see both (all?) sides of the equation! Congrats!
Every time one of these comes up, I always PRAY for a full government shutdown. Yet another way the government leaves me unfulfilled.
Do you remember Trump's first term when they shut the government down? Calmest week or two that I can remember of my whole life.