DriftingSkies

One thing I'd like to point out, Dr. Stein, is that basic income, as opposed to our current system of means-tested welfare programs, is that our current system introduces something called a poverty trap - in order to retain access to these government services, one has to earn under a certain threshold, as well as not have any substantial amount of assets. This means that if someone is earning right under the 133% of the poverty line needed to qualify for Medicaid, they have a strong disincentive from taking a promotion or working additional hours, knowing that they might lose any healthcare access they already have. And because there are asset limits for these programs as well, they can't invest or otherwise save for car repairs, or to go back to school, or other ways to improve themselves because their savings get clawed back by these programs.

It is a very unfortunate consequence of the way these programs are set up that we are at a very real risk of creating a perpetual underclass in wage-slavery.

I disagree with your premise; I and five others local to me are Green Party members running for state / local office - I am running for a state legislator position, and we also have someone running for constable, two people for county supervisor, one for county attorney, and one for county clerk at the local level.

But of course, the corporate media doesn't announce that from every radio broadcast and television set.

As an environmental economist who does modeling work closely tied with the trade and international economics literature, what style of trade policies and system of trade does your organization seek to set as the worldwide standard?

I agree with the sentiment that there are very troubling aspects of the TPP, and there are likely to be some very real disequilibrium effects and distributional consequences, but the economics literature is also fairly clear that trade is, at least in the abstract, a net positive. What is your take on this sentiment?

Most of us aren't security analysts and don't have huge websites that we have to worry about securing from ne'er-do-wells, but all of us have at least some online presence and have information that we don't want to fall into the wrong hands.

Given this:

1) What advice would you give to us as individuals to protect our information from being compromised?

2) How can we as consumers pressure businesses into taking website & data security seriously?

I'm a candidate running for state legislature, and the question being asked by the above poster is one that I've thought long and hard on. I think that the only way we will achieve some semblance of compromise, good-faith negotiating in Congress and in state legislatures is to eliminate the incentives that politicians have to act in such an intransigent manner.

Thanks to gerrymandering and single-member districts, it is true that in many, if not most districts in the country, the primary election for one of the two parties is a de facto election, and the general is little more than a fait accompli. Your district and mine are both examples where the Democrat is nearly assured a victory in the General due to a lack of Republicans - mine probably even moreso than yours. And, because of that, candidates are prone to taking very partisan positions, knowing that the real challenges are likely to come in a primary, and to build support among the party base and elite, at the expense of not building bridges and support from other voters within the district.

I think it is time to move toward a system of multi-member districts, and away from first-past-the-post elections that lead to a two-party, polarized system. Win or lose your election, I hope that you will push your state lawmakers to adopt such policies, and to help get smaller parties representation in the state legislature as well.