Austin's guaranteed basic income pilot program was a hit. A GOP state senator doesn't want it to happen in Houston

Originally published at:


Hmm… Republican. Houston. Doesn’t want to help the poor. Any guesses which church he attends?


So 50% of this money goes straight up the foodchain to the landlords and still Republicans are again’ it…


They hate the poor more than they love the rich.

See also: universal healthcare, which is both morally and pragmatically correct answer for everyone, including literally all businesses except for the for-profit healthcare industry.


Well, you know, “moral hazard” and all of that. The Libertarian mind virus is still a strong one in the GOP.

Still, I do think younger conservative politicians and businesspeople are (reluctantly) coming around to the idea that some form of UBI will be needed in the future, if only to avoid civil disorder or to prop up a sham economy. The adoption of “AI” by business is only accelerating their considering the once unthinkable.

Of course, the fascists will want to limit its distribution in full only to the “right” people, but all conservatives will likely push the “neoliberal” UBI I’ve described previously here (where 50% is indeed instantly earmarked for housing):


In addition to that, these programs often end up saving money in the long run, i.e. you give people $1K a month but you save $1.5K a month. That doesn’t matter to some people though as “you’re giving money away!”

“Numerous studies, for example, have found it would be cheaper to give homes to unhoused people than it is to cover all the costs associated with allowing them to stay on the streets”


The cruelty IS the point


In the “free market of ideas” most socialist policies are winners-- they work and they’re popular.

That’s what the GOP is afraid of.


Anyone else wondering why the state of Texas has a prohibition against gifts?

Scrooge + Grinch = Texas


'Taint enough landlords who are also Texan GOP politicians. Critical greed mass has not been reached yet.


You don’t get it. It doesn’t help the “right” people. /S

Same stupid “I got mine fuck you” mentality of not able to think beyond themselves.


Pshaw, like he’ll care.

1 Like

Yeah. I wish some of our lawyerly friends were here to help answer.
It seems the jackass’ position is centered on the fact that the money is being funneled through a county organization, though I’m sure he’d go after whatever organization was providing it.
But that makes me wonder, if the county is providing pre-K, is that also considered a gift?
Here’s hoping the courts toss this out as the obvious garbage it is.


As we’ve learned in Texas, and will learn nationwide should Trump be elected, the judicial system is only as effective as the belief that it serves all, and not just the party in power. Texas legislators get away with murder because the Texas Supreme Court is aligned with them, and so is the Fifth Circuit, and in its present makeup, SCOTUS is either going to decline to hear or rule against it.

We should not place any faith in the judicial system to save us. We’re at the point now where majorities need to be leveraged to create institutional barriers, and we should have been doing this all along. Look what Wisconsin did and how difficult it is to rollback the GOP takeover.


They cannot even think for themselves. Since the majority of the money went to landlords, it could easily be “I got mine and I got yours, fuck you thanks”.

It’s like other “free” money they reject. The desire to be cruel outweighing the desire to be greedy.

Reading the summary, the first thing I thought was if this was going to make all TX assistance programs illegal.

Functionally, what’s really the difference if the county gives you $100 or $100 worth of food? If one is illegal, why not the other. If one is legal, why not the other.

From a cost perspective, just giving people the $100 is more efficient. In fact, just giving everyone, no matter who or what they make the $100 (or $1,000) is more efficient. Eliminate all the paperwork and overhead, all the means testing and compliance infrastructure completely. Just issue them a 1099 at the end of the year and collect back taxes on whatever percentage their income hit. The people who needed the money aren’t going to owe anything, and the ones who will had enough money to know how to save some to pay the tax at year end. How many more people can these programs help for the same funding when you reduce the expense ratio to almost nothing.

That they work never surprises me.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.