The social liberal and the fiscal conservative in me would like to see Single Payer Healthcare and Universal Basic Income which when combined, would eliminate 79 (not a typo) 79 Federal Agencies and 126 separate anti-poverty programs, and replace them with only 2, saving the taxpayers Billions, perhaps Trillions of dollars every year and boosting the US economy to its highest levels ever according to the most conservative economists ever known to walk the face of the earth:
Conservative Economist Milton Friedman wrote in his 1969 book, Free to Choose:
"We should replace the ragbag of specific welfare programs with a single comprehensive program of income supplements in cash — a negative income tax. It would provide an assured minimum to all persons in need, regardless of the reasons for their need, while doing as little harm as possible to their character, their independence, or their incentives to better their own conditions.
A negative income tax provides comprehensive reform which would do more efficiently and humanely what our present welfare system does so inefficiently and inhumanely."
But unfortunately, the vast majority of conservatives in America don't know what a fiscal conservative really is or how being fiscally conservative really works:
When Nixon tried not once but twice to push this through Congress the Democrats blocked it. Fast forward 40 years and the Republicans are blocking it. Can you say, "Neither side gives a damn about the American people as long as their side wins?"
Yes, a conversion to Single Payer Healthcare and Universal Basic Income would require government and government resources to accomplish. But as Milton Friedman pointed out it would require less government and less government resources than are being expended today. A lot less.
The third option is to do away with government altogether.
Yes, a conversion to Single Payer Healthcare and Universal Basic Income would require government and government resources to accomplish. But as Milton Friedman pointed out it would require less government and less government resources than are being expended today. A lot less.
The third option is to do away with government altogether.
And when one advocates the abolition of government then one becomes an anarchist.
Are you willing to move this conversation forward, share it with others. Or do you intend to forever prove that "Neither side gives a damn about the American people as long as YOUR side wins?"
