We’re old enough to remember when Nancy Pelosi told us that if Obamacare passed, we’d all be free to become photographers or filmmakers because we wouldn’t have to work traditional full-time jobs just to have health insurance. San Francisco Mayor London Breed has signed up with Mayors for a Guaranteed Income, and artists should be very happy.
We're thrilled to welcome Mayor @LondonBreed of San Francisco, CA to MGI! The American people deserve bold leaders who will meet the moment and advocate for policies such as a #guaranteedincome so we can recover even stronger and more resilient than before. pic.twitter.com/K9WsudEj1l
— Mayors for a Guaranteed Income (@mayorsforagi) May 5, 2021
Which people? She specifies in a follow-up tweet:
San Francisco is implementing guaranteed income programs to support artists, Black and Pacific Islander mothers, and people training to become EMTs. We're looking forward to working with @mayorsforagi to lift up our residents and strengthen our communities. https://t.co/uO09hTpvtc
— London Breed (@LondonBreed) May 5, 2021
“Artists, Black and Pacific Islander mothers, and people training to become EMTs” … what?
Recommended
Can I identify as one of these classes if I am interested in receiving the guaranteed income?
— J.Maxx (@Libertarian247) May 5, 2021
I identify as a SF artist
— Semantic Overlord (@chuck_finnnnn) May 6, 2021
I assumed when she says, "Artists" what she means is, "My unemployed friends from college.
Seriously though, how could you craft fair selection criteria for which of the thousands of artists to pay?
— Zeb Fisk (@ZebFisk) May 6, 2021
So who qualifies as an "artist?" I'm guessing the art has to be approved by the People's Revolutionary Council on Appropriate Thought.
— Barney TheDeceiver (@BThedeceiver) May 5, 2021
Artists? FFS, signal harder.
— Mook T. (@MichaelTheroff) May 6, 2021
I’m an artist – gimme monies! pic.twitter.com/youhRUjgBg
— Mike (@Vrtual_Mike) May 6, 2021
Why does an artist need to be given a guaranteed income by the city when what they do serves no purpose to the general public?
— UpYours 🇺🇸 (@NickAntons123) May 6, 2021
Pacific Islanders only make up 0.2% of the city. So fewer than a dozen mothers…?
Why not Hispanic or Asian mothers? Or just mothers in poverty?
— Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) May 5, 2021
I guess poor white mothers don't exist these days.
— Sunil (@focaltraveller) May 6, 2021
Are we just using a dartboard to determine which skin color qualifies for certain handouts?
— Bryan (@brostoevksy) May 5, 2021
Did you put a bunch of ethnicities and job titles in a hat and grab the first three slips of paper?
— Ben (@soccerfan1983) May 6, 2021
Getting money without producing products/services causes costs of goods to skyrocket. It puts everyone, including those getting the money, in a worse position.
— John Miles (@imjmiles) May 5, 2021
Also an incentive to continue to do nothing.
— Ciccio Puletti (@CiccioPuletti) May 5, 2021
Wait, what? You are paying people based on race? Is this a serious tweet?
— JoeyMags (@josephm1919) May 5, 2021
Good job on reintroducing racism in 2021! A program that excludes people based on the color of their skin.
— Crime_is_Downsf (@CDownsf) May 5, 2021
Congrats on implementing institutional racism.
— Crusaders Gangsters and Groupies (@MLS_Rossi) May 5, 2021
Would be great if San Francisco could focus on something other than race when it’s completely irrelevant
— Luka Gurgen (@skdif7) May 6, 2021
Can any attorneys advise whether race-based government aid is legal?
It feels unconstitutional, but I’m not an expert in this area.
— John Hornbuckle (@JohnRHornbuckle) May 6, 2021
Besides being racist, isn't this a violation of the 14h Amendment to equal protection under the law?
— Basil "Lower East Nothing" Fawlty (@InncentBystndr) May 6, 2021
Only real question here is:
When the SCOTUS strikes this down as equal protection violation is it a 6-3 decision or 9-0 decision?
— Mike Chowla (@mchowla) May 5, 2021
This is what real systemic racism looks like. Actual government programs which discriminate by race.
And democrats are celebrating it because they think it's the "right kind" of racial discrimination.
As if there is such a thing as the "right kind" of racial discrimination.
— Jim Martin (@The_Jim_Martin) May 6, 2021
Racist. Sexist. Bigoted. Unconstitutional.
— Eugene G. Bernat (@genebernat) May 6, 2021
An institution that is prejudiced by race. Like, if there were only a term for institutional race something, help me out here
— Vincent (@slatermaus) May 6, 2021
People need to start filing lawsuits
— DigDugPacMan (@DigDugPacMan) May 5, 2021
Lawsuits incoming.
— Ray Sawhill (@raysawhill) May 6, 2021
How are you paying for this??
— Peggy (@DesiFlurane) May 6, 2021
This psychopathic fruitloop of a mayor, a mental teenager with no sense of principles, needs to understand the major group needing financial support are the very businesses she ruined and destroyed with her insane, unconstitutional shutdown mandates! What a fraud and hypocrite!
— Not Applicable (@NoLongerHere59) May 5, 2021
We’ll have to look into it, but we’re wondering how many other mayors have thrown in with Mayors for a Guaranteed Income.
What level of Democrat is this? https://t.co/rHIc9UkZtL
— Zaid Jilani (@ZaidJilani) May 5, 2021
Related:
Hot take: Batman could have solved all crime in Gotham City by establishing universal basic income https://t.co/qAYZTNJZjp
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 7, 2020
