= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (126)
Your picture of people on welfare seems a bit rosy. You think everyone has credit cards?
Correct. However that generally involves declaring personal bankruptcy, at which point you're locked out of all credit (including credit cards) for a few years.
It is, of course, possible to make GBI, to use a legal term, "non-garnishable" meaning it cannot be collected to satisfy a judgement against a person. But that would make it impossible to use it as collateral for a loan to buy equipment, for example. The child support payments also could become an issue.
Does it? I didn't say it was a good thing.
I don't need the premise that everyone has credit cards to support the conclusion that some people on welfare do. I hear news stories about it.
But you could set a non-garnishable component that is less than the whole GBI. I am still not seeing a novel problem.
I'm not saying there is a novel problem. I'm saying there are old problems that GBI does not magically solve, mostly revolving around the very old observation that a fool and his money are soon parted.
Did anyone say it solved those problems?
Penicillin doesn't cure the common cold either.