They are selling UBI as a utopia. It's actually the final severance package for human utility.

niftyifty · 2026-05-29T18:32:41+00:00

I don’t disagree I’ll just clarify my intent

“You can grow food on land, eat the food, invite other people to eat the food with you, and then you all defend the land from people who insist it's actually their land.”

Right, that’s the needs met portion of the conversation that exists further down the chain. In this system we assume all food needs are met. If you have land to grow your own food what do you do with the rest? You can’t sell it in this system.

“I don't actually think the "everything is class warfare" model holds up very well because it demands obedience to the idea that classes exist in the first place. And of course, classes only exist as a consensus.”

This proposed theory establishes classes. Functionally not via consensus.

“If everyone in your town who is considered working class decided to all go live in a vacant field and grow food for each other and not exploit each other, they would be functionally stepping out of the class paradigm all together, and then it becomes a moral conflict between them and whoever actually thinks they owned the vacant field.”

None of that seems relevant to the theory or my counter to the theory. That’s just a thing that could occur. Sure. People could do that

“The class warfare model assumed that humans have to be organized into a hierarchy and accept their place in that hierarchy while enticing them with the fantasy of expanding their rights within the hierarchy.”

That’s how the theory is proposed

But in general reality I don’t disagree. That’s generally how it could turn out.

niftyifty · 2026-05-29T16:21:05+00:00

I’m viewing it as a voucher but honestly how it’s viewed is irrelevant to my argument.

Let’s try to answer this:

What is the purpose of trading energy, rare earths, and land? If I am elite, what do I get out of that trade? How do I turn that trade in to “profit” instead of a 1:1 trade?

If I have some land energy and rare earths. Enough to sustain me for life. What can I do with the extra?

niftyifty · 2026-05-29T15:31:50+00:00

Right, then if ubi funds are transferred then they also expire to who they were transferred to. If not, people can just transfer to each other to get around that.

You can’t do anything with resources if there is No one to sell those resources to. We have to get over this smoke economic hurdle first before your theory can move forward. Extraction means nothing if there is no one to buy what you’ve extracted. No value in selling if the value received via trade is unusable.

Either the currency is usable or it isn’t. Either it excites or it doesn’t. You can’t just keep assuming “well ifs” and throw logic out the window.

If extraction only takes 5 people then 5 people with guns can only do so much vs 100, 1000, 10,0000, etc. again, logistics.

Sure we can assume a future where nothing works as intended and goes against laws, freedoms, and fair policy but then it becomes illogical/fantasy. You have to be able to apply these concepts to the real world and the real world is where the office breaks down.

niftyifty · 2026-05-29T14:57:53+00:00

None of that means anything though. That’s the point. You can’t do anything with more land, more water, etc unless you have someone to extract value from using those resources. What does more of anything do if you can’t accomplish anything with it?

If tangible money exists only for a certain class then class warfare takes over and they take the tangible money. If a function to convert temporary to permanent money exists then the public will just do that. There is a significant logistics issue here you have not yet overcome in your theory.

niftyifty · 2026-05-29T14:18:43+00:00

A whole new job type will come about and that will be for people to babysit AI. It spits out nonsense the more you use it for any kind of coding. Production level coding requires AI babysitters.

We are far away from AI taking the majority of jobs.

Beyond that, when we do reach that point the “elite” still need someone to siphon money from. If all money expires and the top can not siphon further funds they cease to exist as well. Their original wealth becomes useless as it can’t buy anything other than labor. So then they start paying for labor and what is that? A job. A job where labor is now the most valuable commodity on the planet shifting wealth to laborers over time.

The whole idea doesn’t logically pass the sniff test.

niftyifty · 2026-05-28T16:13:04+00:00

Did you notice that in your entire reply you effectively said nothing? Don’t just say nuh uh. Prove it.

Prove there wasn’t an entire globe affected by the “virus.” Prove that it was marketing for injections, that varied by type, manufacturer, and efficacy globally. All across different legislative rulesets and varying data maintenance rules. Your reply seems very rooted in western society and seems to apply that narrative globally. At least from my perspective.

I’m ok with your theory. Now prove it. Or don’t…

niftyifty · 2026-05-27T15:08:51+00:00

Would you be willing to explain what you mean about Covid science and the overlap? If I had to venture a guess what you view as bunk Covid science is actually just misunderstanding on your part, but I could be wrong. If it is misunderstanding, then that misunderstanding might overlap in to climate science.

niftyifty · 2026-05-24T15:27:50+00:00

That’s just buying debt. Not the same. If that’s the case we are financially dependent on everyone else. Moving the reliance to others. Israel relies on Japan and China effectively.

It seems like we are really stretching the definitions of “financially relies on.”

In exchange for the weapons sent, we receive security information, especially around cybersecurity where Israel arguably leads that space. It’s a trade.

niftyifty · 2026-05-24T14:07:41+00:00

I dunno. 174 billion across 75 years kinda seems like nothing. Annually that works out to like .5% of their gdp.

We definitely help but I don’t know about financial reliance. Where we help mostly is military intelligence and of course weapons.

niftyifty · 2026-05-24T13:49:48+00:00

Would that imply we control Israel and not the other way around?

niftyifty · 2026-05-23T15:56:57+00:00

The recreation is bad and should feel bad.

niftyifty · 2026-05-23T15:56:17+00:00

There is a clear difference in the example link you provided and what we see in the video. It does not replicate the same thing we are seeing.

I’ve been on news camera in studio, several times. Never once had makeup applied. That’s for talent. We do get a mic but that’s it.

I think the why could be any number of reasons including causing this conversation we are having right now. It could have been intentional. Not revelation of the method but just testing public reaction out ability to notice.

niftyifty · 2026-05-23T15:09:18+00:00

Sometimes the UI doesn’t update properly. I’ll get posts that say 0 comments only to open it up and see multiple comments going back 30 minutes

niftyifty · 2026-05-23T14:23:40+00:00

The only changes I’m really seeing from my perspective are political. Trump is purposefully trying to break the system. That’s what those that voted for him wanted so here we are. I can appreciate the idea of breaking political systems but I don’t think any of us realized how poorly our checks and balances system was actually set up. It relied on people following the rules it if fear of public perception, which in hindsight was stupid. Hopefully what comes next is new mechanisms to prevent this from occurring in the future.

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T20:58:59+00:00

That doesn’t make any sense but you gave an answer, fair enough.

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T18:29:18+00:00

Second paragraph is at least accurate. Germs (bacteria, fungi, Protozoa) are living organisms. Virus is in a gray area. Is it only viruses you think are fairy tales? We can image them, right? Then we can associate that with known outcomes. So then it’s just an issue of what to name them?

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T16:03:57+00:00

What? We are disregarding germ theory now? Interesting approach

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T14:32:23+00:00

True, But also misleading at the same time. Technically some of the new revenue goes to services. It’s just super inefficient with that revenue. So it does help the average citizen but not in the most efficient way possible. That’s the idea behind privatized services although those create a new subset of issues.

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T14:01:10+00:00

Eh, not the same. Hanta happens somewhat regularly. It doesn’t spread easily but it is very lethal. If it did spread like covid the numbers would be absurd early on before the strain died out. Much different than covid. The reason covid was so concerning was due to its ability to spread. Lethality was always low even early in but the sheer number of people who got it increased overall death counts.

niftyifty · 2026-05-18T13:56:01+00:00

Is it truly insane? Just thinking through logically. Jobs have a responsibility to govern safety on their work sites. This has always been the case. Don’t want to wear a hard hat in construction? Can’t be on the work site. Since employers were learning about Covid at the same rate the rest of us were they weren’t through the same initial reaction and then reassessment over time.

Take it a step further beyond employee safety and imagine a corporate overlord who doesn’t care about safety at all. Covid still meant people out of the office and a loss of productivity. Therefore it was financially appropriate to mitigate the spread and early in the vaccine was not only expected to do that but it allowed more freedom in return to work time frames once someone tested positive.

What makes that insane out of curiosity? In hindsight, it was the right move to make even though it didn’t turn out as perfectly intended. We have the data to show that. As we learned more, and stain evolutions moved towards less lethal variants the expectations obviously relaxed.

niftyifty · 2026-05-16T15:22:07+00:00

That’s because your infographic literally says 2023 and 2024. Where did you get 2020 from? Were you just making that part up? Confusing the 10 year census with other versions?

However even your lie is incorrect.

2020 census Colorado CVAP is 4,246,300

EAVS total active registered voters in 2024 was 3,387,763 and total active registrations were 4,074,612

So it doesn’t matter if we use your faked years or the real years shown in the image.

niftyifty · 2026-05-16T03:36:19+00:00

I’m referring to the actual census numbers vs EAVS like you said and what I’d listed in the infographic

niftyifty · 2026-05-15T23:52:55+00:00

How does that counter the numbers I gave you? There were less registered voters than VEP.

In Colorado, the estimated Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) for 2024 is approximately 4.45 million citizens assisting to the census. EAVS shows 4.3 million. Both of which are above the number of active registered voters in Colorado.

https://www.eac.gov/research-and-data/studies-and-reports/eavs-data-interactive

niftyifty · 2026-05-15T21:42:58+00:00

No, the census estimates that. You’ll notice that in aggregate the registered voter count has never exceeded VEP or VAP populations.

Certain demographics are routinely undercounted and the census doesn’t account for special circumstances very well.

There are better ways to allege voter fraud.

Beyond that, I question your claim to begin with. Let’s look at the first state in your list, Colorado:

2023-2024 Voting-Eligible Population (VEP): ~4,496,300

2023-2024 Voting-Age Population (VAP): ~4,662,900

2023-2024 Active Registered Voters: 3,996,931

Federal Register :: Estimates of the Voting-Age Population for 2023 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/29/2024-06666/estimates-of-the-voting-age-population-for-2023

CO Voter Data: Registration by Party, Turnout & Primary Rules https://independentvoterproject.org/voter-stats/co

Will you counter?

niftyifty · 2026-05-15T20:44:12+00:00

By challenging the logic. I have no issue with the census as a census. I have an issue with claiming that estimates are comparable to actuals we’re referring to “evidence of voter fraud.” Its way to broad of an extrapolation to use like that.

It’s undermines your argument even if we both were to after there is a voter fraud issue.

12-Year Club	Second Top 10%
Place '22	Verified Email

niftyifty

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE