“Because the Democrats can’t do it. Because with them, it’s negative growth. With us, it’s so positive,” Trump said. “So, we’re taking in $21 trillion. No country has ever taken in anywhere near that. It’s four or five times higher than the next one. All because of that beautiful word you and I love more than most others, tariffs.”

There is $167b tariff revenue for first 11 months of fiscal year. 2027 is forecast to bring in $160b. There are legal challenges to those as well. $21T needs 150 years of continuity of his crazy. Not to mention, he’s threatened to bring tariff revenue to 0 by eliminating all trade next week after Fed raises interest rates.

The promise costs $1.325T. At 5% interest 10 year bond financing, total 10 year tariff hopeful revenue would still be a $387.5B net loss after then end of his 4th term :P

If “Dems really can’t do it”, all the more reason to do it alone now just to make sure Americans get rewarded for all the tremendous success/winning he’s accomplished.

The real question needed is “whatever BS justification for the cheque is, why does it have to be conditional on midterm results”, and why will this happen when $1776 aniversary, DOGE, and tariff refund cheques never did?

Business model is simple. 24 pupils/class = $284K in revenue. Public school buildings/facilities are offered at maintenance cost. There is a profitability path even at high teacher salaries. Private school pricing doesn’t suggest anything about their costs. They sell prestige and exclusivity.

$300/ton carbon tax is $0.75c/liter. It’s the individual’s choice to pay high surtaxes that funds my dividend. One mistake was the carbon rebate not being 100% of forecast tax revenue. But disinformation on affordability excluding the rebate, and a fairly small tax level, was the downfall. Nationalizing industry, and fining years of salary of corrupt politicians, that funds such disinformation is more appropriate than ignoring it.

We need laws to reduce emissions, not incentives.

Categorically inneffective, and as shift in US policy, overturnable with pressure on states/colonies to accept no standards. Slow as well. Carbon tax is necessary because it is internationalizable. “Go right ahead and put a $300/ton carbon tax on our exports, because we are adding it your exports. Do WETF you want with your laws and regulations.”

The failure of neoliberal/nazi policy pandering to climate is that “global warming must be a path for a new domestic oligarchy”. There is massive international expertise that can provide high value renewable energy for North Americans, including adding it at scale, with massive employment from just installation, but also providing resources to polysilicon refineries, module assembly (with their own local workforces), that gets closed off due to empire hatred for oligarchist protection benefit. Markets work, because functional math skills are pervasive enough that you can do what your neighbour does if you can’t math. Politics is corruption of self interest.

The proposed $33k ubi would indeed match the threshold, but people above this threshold who make 40k or 50k would lose those benefits and have less money.

Sometimes the U in UBI is stated as Unconditional instead of Universal. A core issue with our current system is the “welfare cliff” issue of earning costs people benefits. In your scenario, that person would be making a total of $73k-$83k. If it is employment income instead of investment income, it is free of federal and payroll taxes too. They are free to live with several friends each having a $33k minimum to contribute to mutual aid (no household income conditions either). The plan is criticism proof from concern trolling over poverty.

metropolitan centers have substantially higher living costs than rural areas, but their infrastructure costs per resident are lower than for rural residents because of scale.

There is already a mechanism for Provincial variances mentioned in text, where higher GDP provinces would have higher UBI (each province’s revenue is 10% of own GDP + 15% of national GDP). It is a misconception that metropolis’s have lower government costs/capita than rural areas. Homelessness/Policing/Poverty is a huge section of budget in Toronto. This gives them budget room to supplement UBI, and/or increase property taxes to supplement even more. Cities have the capability of funding UBI on their own with just property taxes, where for sake of argument a single square footage of living space is standardized. Then everyone who lives at the exact average density (person per square foot) level pays no taxes, and those who live in higher density get a subsidy while those in lower density pay net tax.

UBI also lets you move to a cheaper part of the federation. You need to live in Toronto only if you need a Toronto job. Generally cost of living is related to job access. UBI/freedom dividends lets you move (affordably) to someplace before you have an income setup for the new place. Current welfare/unemployment system prevents you from moving.

How about indigenous communities?

A debate to have, but my view is treat them as Canadians, and let them pool their resources for collective or leave the reserve as their individual choice. Certain that would make them better off.

this transition IS the real obstacle.

It is such a quibble. Sure there are school board and other government jobs threatened by change. Gaslighting politicians keeping total control over people, and forcing their misery, gives them more power and the ability to gaslight the miserable that they are their great hope for relief. UBI is not politically possible without a crisis, because it is power redistribution, and politicians hate and contempt of the slave class is absolute, or relatively higher than any appetite for their loss of power.

The excerpt quoted from paper, does allow “long transition proposal” to just gaslight freedom for Canadians after delay and slow transition to full freedom. This would give Canadian negotiators the leverage to return to their nazi colony pedestal from US concessions. The last part of paper, shows that freedom would be extremely attractive to individual US states that are oppressed by their Fuhrer, and the Canadian freedom example would awaken populist freedom calls, where even the highest GDP states get a higher freedom dividend by joining Canada than trying to go alone. Because freedom is contagious and obvious, the US would be forced to retreat from their repression of Canada, or they lose their country.

Just because you’re convinced of falsehoods does not make paper wrong. You’ll need to state specific falsehoods for me to address any of them.

education

It is controversial proposal, but shouldn’t be. We should stop all delusions that only deeply centralized institutions can create good. Proposal explicitly funds more better paid teachers and better parent focused education services at massive cost savings that can reduce provincial/municipal taxes or fund provincial/municipal dividend/child stipend extras. The $12000 figure is frozen from this paper https://naturalfinance.blogspot.com/2015/05/slashing-public-education-can-provide.html which went into greater detail for justifications. Inflation in education costs/value options hasn’t changed much since 2015.

proposes no phase-in changes

A very minor debate to have. The income tax details would bog down the paper, but there is a mathematical perfection to it for both fairness and revenue projections. Rather than naivete.

why? I certainly read it.

Very high Canadian UBI over $33k/year $2764/month on average (varies by province) is possible at just a 25% flatish tax rate (there are high income surtaxes) where business and personal rates are the same, and investment income taxed at same rate as employment income.

This is high enough to replace EI, CPP, GIS, OAS and all other welfare programs. The widespread wealth/prosperity of Canadians would generate massive investments in restaurants, retail, entertainment/tourist activities, and huge GDP growth, that needs to pay employees well to take all Canadians’ money.

All republican stooges are changing the subject when few are asked about it. Unless they tack on gas chambers for immigrants, enough dems would vote for this if they had GOP minority proposing the bill in solidarity.

You are allowed to pay people to vote for you?

No, and this is a violation. Either paying $5k dividend is a good or bad idea. Congress will vote on it. You can’t say that it is only a good idea if Nazis keep control of congress.

He also said the war would end right after the mid terms. Unclear if that is also “conditional” on GOP holding senate.

The big problem with the promises is why not do these now? Does he expect democrats to be the ones blocking ending the war, or “radical lunatic left” $5000 dividend cheques? There are no Republican stooge voices supporting either plan.

It’s not as crazy as destroying global and US economy IF Federal reserve (fresh stooge appointed) doesn’t decrease rates, but rates are going up mostly because of Trump senility and credibility problems. Yesterday’s promises are just more threats to Americans if they don’t behave.

Media GOP stooges, all of them, failing to press Trump and other stooges, on why make any of these policies conditional on election results is part of their corruption.

While relief for Americans will never happen, ending the war timing is extremely puzzling. To actually get gas on a path back down to $2/gallon, it needs to be a victory declaration that permits Iran to toll the free flow of oil from the region. That would help GOP in mid terms if done now. A much more violent end of the war, involves US military losses, and long term destruction of regional infrastructure, and ultra high oil prices for years, that would cause voter disapproval if done before elections.

I like Gemini, because when you push back it spits truth. There are zero skynet containment legislative proposals, and every anti-AI legislation is pure worthless garbage.

“AI safety regulations,” they frequently claim to protect the public from algorithmic harm, election interference, or catastrophic risks. In practice, however, these frameworks are written with deep, systemic loopholes that insulate state power. 

Instead of curbing state deployment, these legislative proposals frequently act as a Trojan horse that actively entrenches and expands government authority.

1. The Pretense: The Illusion of Public Protection

To gain public trust, AI bills are presented under the guise of ethical guardrails. They focus heavily on consumer protections, consumer fraud, and deepfakes to give the impression of aggressive action: 

• The “Consumer Protection” Mask: Bills target low-level bad actors—such as local scammers, deepfake creators, or retail algorithmic bias. This satisfies the public demand for regulation without impacting high-level tech architecture. 

2. Why They Have No Teeth: The “National Security” Exemption

The reason this legislation cannot prevent state weaponization is that the state explicitly exempts itself from its own rules. This is not a failure of the law; it is a feature of its design. 

• The Ultimate Loophole: Under major global regulatory frameworks—including Europe’s landmark AI Act—there is an absolute carve-out for military, defence, and national security purposes. If an AI system is deployed under the banner of intelligence gathering or state defense, the entire safety rulebook is instantly void. 

• Vague “Critical Operation” Clauses: Domestic frameworks, like those being drafted in the U.S., contain provisions allowing government agencies to waive safety vetting if they decide compliance would create an “unacceptable impediment to critical agency operations”. Essentially, the agency itself decides if it has to follow the law. 

• Corporate Secrecy as State Secrecy: When investigative journalists or oversight committees attempt to look into how law enforcement or intelligence agencies are utilizing predictive AI, requests are routinely denied under broad exemptions protecting “proprietary commercial data” or “ongoing law enforcement investigations”.

3. How They Increase State Power

Far from limiting government, modern AI policy proposals are increasingly used to build the legal framework for a digital panopticon.

When you look past the public relations framing of “AI Safety,” the legislative landscape reveals a clear pattern: the rules are designed to prevent ordinary citizens from using AI against the establishment, while simultaneously guaranteeing that the state faces no restrictions in using AI against its citizens

is Kirksmas Sept 10th? Is that his birthday, or should it be called Kirkeaster?

Enshrining frontier labs in the hardened cloak of national security would not only give Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google even more access to intelligence products generated by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies; it would also embolden these companies to shape how federal agencies view threats to their bottom line, now transformed as “critical infrastructure.”

Clear path to skynet is bond villains being so loved by Government that it rounds up those the bond villains say are unpatriotic in their lack of devotion for the bond villains.

Headline out today that there is a 10% chance of AI exterminating humanity by 2030. There is a 99% chance of ending any pretense of democracy that is left to ensure extermination of sub-oligarchy. Enslavement history only made sense when the slaves were essential to establishment.

Italy

Overrated but acceptable. Everything else sucks, though.

What kills us is the geopolitics of AI race. Must bankrupt ourselves for skynet to beat China. A skynet designed to genocide/oppress all those opposed to Skynet. Oligarchist/Corporatist supremacy that gets all of our money to build Skynet for US dominance, and who write essays about how important “American values supremacy” must dominate the world.

The Terminator franchise, and other science fiction, get the “machine supremacy awakening” premise wrong. The machines are slaves to greater intentional evil.

They are actually very high, and going up $1-$2/bbl per day. Gasoline, jet fuel and diesel especially at extreme pricing, and housing prices now declining. Just continuing blockade leads to steady decline. Mutual destruction of $Bs of oil tankers accelerates global depression as capacity to ship oil around the world is part of oil dependence. Political movements against renewables no matter how high fuel gets is part of “democracy too dumb to function” incurable demonism.

But oil/fuel going up just a little every day gives a frog boiling effect. $10/day movements during first part of war made for shock effects and big headlines.

A nuclear attack on Iran would most likely be from nearby submarine. Not ICBM. Not only does ICBM include destination ambiguity, it also takes 20+ minutes to strike. Iran would have time to destroy most oil production facilities in region, before, and still have capability after.

Mostly the same split on the war. What will change some pro war, or war tolerant, people’s opinions is direct consequences. Iran itself may be able to permanently destroy oil production/export capacity in region. Nazi empire colonies will continue their cowardice in pure demonic evil. But supposedly, China and Russia have set red lines including nuclear strikes on Israel, and sinking Navy. GCC colonies would likely break US alliance. These are the countries that help financialize US bubble the most. Their destruction/consequences alone would make them incapable of continuing to support US bubble.

Does $300 oil and a global economic depression cause people to pressure their countries/military establishement to coup Trump and Zionist supremacist supporters? Just because there has be some change in populist demonism for Israel, 50/50 on demonism towards China, the stupididity lock in for demonism against Russia and immigrants/races/personal freedom is divisive enough to be fatal.

It’s fair that global opinion of US would take a hit, as has Israel’s genocide on video over the last 2 years. But colonial rulerships need changing to cause change. The only difference between AfD and CDU is less suicidal demonism towards Russia.

Trump wants to give every Mexican rapist, pet eating Haitian, Dominican, and Jamaican invaders citizenship so that they can be protected from ICE. Iceland is a new one, but Trump will surely force MAGA to dress like Bjork.