4 ms·

The BI proponents typically forget that there's some average amount of money that would work for everyone, but there is clearly a power-law at the expensive end

The BI proponents typically forget that there's some average amount of money that would work for everyone, but there is clearly a power-law at the expensive end of social services. As an example, I have an extended family member who was born happy and healthy but contracted meningitis at 5 years old and was severely mentally handicapped afterwards. For the past 20 years, his parents have provided his extensive care buoyed by social security disability, but they won't be around forever, so then what? Giving him or some agent on his behalf $12k/year isn't going to come close to paying for the level of support that he needs. There are millions of people in similar situations that could not survive without significant amounts of money which is almost entirely funded by the government. Just assuming that this will be covered by any basic income is silly.

pc86 11y ago
So at that point it basically becomes a "you only get BI unless you need more," which is really just what we have now but everyone gets a $12k/yr kicker on top, right (to use your figure).
- SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
  Throw in single-payer to cover health issues (and include mental health issues) and you'll cover 98% of the problem. People play PowerBall to extremes and similar because they're desperate. I doubt $12k/year would be sufficient, BTW. You want people to be able to live a decent, if spartan, life on BI, and at $12k I think they'd be forced to decide between starving or extremely poor living conditions. Probably $18k/year would be an absolute minimum, plus allowances for kids (how to handle kids is a HUGE question, well outside the scope of this post). The amount you earn could vary by chosen living area, in proportion to living expenses. Maybe not 100% proportionally; if an area has 150% of the cost of living, but only pays you 125% more than the nominal amount, there would still be a pressure to move to less expensive areas, but more expensive areas wouldn't de facto exclude people on BI. There needs to be extended discussion on the details. I don't know nearly enough to be able to have all of the answers. But it seems like the answer is out there, if enough people get together to work on it.
SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
>power-law at the expensive end of social services. Single-payer health care that extends to psychological services and mental handicaps would cover this, right? Some people need to be institutionalized, or otherwise supported 24/7. BI allows us to close most government assistance programs, but there still would need to be subsidized health care. Maybe there's a serious co-pay for living arrangements, deducted from BI, so that people don't just claim psychological problems to get free housing. But the problem is solvable.

pc86 11y ago

So at that point it basically becomes a "you only get BI unless you need more," which is really just what we have now but everyone gets a $12k/yr kicker on top, right (to use your figure).

SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
Throw in single-payer to cover health issues (and include mental health issues) and you'll cover 98% of the problem. People play PowerBall to extremes and similar because they're desperate. I doubt $12k/year would be sufficient, BTW. You want people to be able to live a decent, if spartan, life on BI, and at $12k I think they'd be forced to decide between starving or extremely poor living conditions. Probably $18k/year would be an absolute minimum, plus allowances for kids (how to handle kids is a HUGE question, well outside the scope of this post). The amount you earn could vary by chosen living area, in proportion to living expenses. Maybe not 100% proportionally; if an area has 150% of the cost of living, but only pays you 125% more than the nominal amount, there would still be a pressure to move to less expensive areas, but more expensive areas wouldn't de facto exclude people on BI. There needs to be extended discussion on the details. I don't know nearly enough to be able to have all of the answers. But it seems like the answer is out there, if enough people get together to work on it.

SomeCallMeTim 11y ago

>power-law at the expensive end of social services. Single-payer health care that extends to psychological services and mental handicaps would cover this, right? Some people need to be institutionalized, or otherwise supported 24/7. BI allows us to close most government assistance programs, but there still would need to be subsidized health care. Maybe there's a serious co-pay for living arrangements, deducted from BI, so that people don't just claim psychological problems to get free housing. But the problem is solvable.