7 ms·
While I'm a bit enamoured of UBI myself, a thought came to me while reading this: If we are going to be dismantling the welfare system at the same time we impl
by Eridrus 11y ago
While I'm a bit enamoured of UBI myself, a thought came to me while reading this:
If we are going to be dismantling the welfare system at the same time we implement UBI, we will have absolutely no margin for error; if UBI turns out to be the wrong policy, then rebuilding the welfare system will be very difficult after having fired all the people who make it function.
Living in Oakland, I also think his point about housing is particularly salient. The ideal of basic income is that employers should hold less power over employees, but that won't be the case if you need the wage to afford rent.
- aidenn0 11y agoYou become more mobile with basic income though. I don't live in the midwest, because the job market there is pretty poor; as a bachelor, I could have stayed on the couch of a friend's house while looking for jobs, but with a family of 6, that's less of a possibility. If my family got enough in UBI to support us in Indiana, then we could move there and I could take my time finding a job. UBI doesn't eliminate inequality, but it can open up more options. My bigger concern with UBI is that we may eliminate the parts of the welfare system that treats addicts, and a lot of sick people will get sicker under it.
- Retra 11y agoThe part of our welfare system that treats medical problems is already pretty awful at doing so. UBI sort of came onto the scene as a way of dealing with both public healthcare and loss of jobs to automation. In theory, UBI can pay for cheap treatments, and insurance (private or public) would pay for the rest.
- JacobAldridge 11y agoThe potential impact on education and healthcare was the only concerning element of this criticism that caught my attention.
- skybrian 11y agoA big bang approach would be very disruptive. I think it would be better to start at a modest level, and increase it after people get used to the idea and can see some of the effects. There's no minimum to get started. Something like $100 a month might be hardly noticeable to most people, but it will make a difference to anyone living on the edge. Also consider that having a guaranteed income makes it that much more feasible to either move somewhere with a low cost of living (since it doesn't depend on a job), or alternatively, afford to move somewhere a bit more expensive. Hard to say how it would shake out.
- Eridrus 11y agoPersonally I'm all for taxing the shit out of rich people (higher rates, treating capital gains as income, high inheritance taxes, abolishing loopholes that let companies stash profits overseas where they're not effectively reinvested, etc), but I feel like the argument around UBI is more likely to involve cuts, because if we gave every person in the US $100/month, it would cost the US $385 billion dollars, which is 10% of the entire federal tax budget.
- gozo 11y agoYeah, that's one thing that seem strange to me. In the US you have all these highly profitable tech companies that stash their profits overseas, but at the same time complain how they can't find enough talent. While the middle class are now supposed to get UBI because they don't have enough education to stay in the workforce. How about instead you close the loopholes, reform taxes and direct the money towards education. On the other hand maybe Google could buy their own school in the Cayman Islands...
- MCRed 11y agoPlease explain how Apple a company that made a computer in china, and then sells that same compute run china, and keeps the profits from selling the computer in China is "stashing its profits overseas". This argument presumes that all money made worldwide should be taxed in the USA. No country does that.
- stephengillie 11y agoWhat if we make the welfare office also be the UBI office? Can we extend the welfare system to everyone, and just start calling it UBI?
- Eridrus 11y agoWhy do we need an "office" for UBI? It should just be deposited in people's bank accounts (we already collect bank account data with taxes) without the need to go to the welfare office.
- Retra 11y agoSome people don't have bank accounts.
- dingaling 11y agoThe UK requires all welfare recipients to have a bank account and to enable this legislation was passed requiring retail banks to provide basic, non-discriminatory current accounts. They don't pay interest and don't have an overdraft but are available to everyone.
- jpindar 11y agoAnd right now some of those people get benefits or wages via a dedicated debt card, which is effectively a withdraw-only bank account.
- peteretep 11y agoYou need an office because fraud.
- jacalata 11y agoBecause not everyone has to file taxes. Because maybe you want to change banks some time between tax returns. Primarily because some people are talking about a system that could plausibly be implemented given the state of the US today and not how a system might work given an otherwise perfect world where, for instance, everyone in the US has been given access to a bank account.
- shandian 11y agoYou could start by implementing basic income as a direct replacement for minimum wage, so only people who are working would be eligible. Then you could slowly absorb other social services like welfare/etc. I'm not sure if that would be feasible or beneficial at all though.
- ccleve 11y agoThat's what the earned income tax credit does.