3 ms·

> Whether you make $40k, $100k, or $500k, the $10k isn't there to prove "additional income support". The system could be set up so that after basic income is im

> Whether you make $40k, $100k, or $500k, the $10k isn't there to prove "additional income support". The system could be set up so that after basic income is implemented, your disposable income is the same as it was before--people making $40k wouldn't have $10k in free money to spend, because their taxes would go up $10k a year, for example. > So if you make over $100k a year, you might be taxed $15k more than you were before, but you would also receive $10k. So basically as a middle class person, I don't benefit at all, I may even lose money, but some kid who has no income and wants to live in his parents basement gets $10k/yr for contributing nothing to society? Am I understanding this correctly? The upper class won't care - this is pennies to them, but this is going to bite the middle class badly and completely change their incentives to avoiding getting housing and living as cheaply as possible to minimize or eliminate work. You always have to think very carefully about the incentives you create with something like this. This seems to create very bad incentives to me, incentives which would have caused me to make very, very different decisions in life drawing me away from any sort of productivity in society. I'm not strictly against this idea, but as you've presented it, I can't see a way this would ever be implemented, how would you sell it to the middle class?

soared 11y ago
The idea is that the taxes scale, so for the middle class the tax is negligible. You get $10k, and your taxes are increased by $12k if you're making less than $100k. As for teenagers sitting in their parents basement - The thought is that $10k lets them live and do anything they please instead of being tied to a shitty job or their parents basement. In theory they will choose to contribute to society in some way and not just play video games all day. But that is what we need to test - Will people choose to play video games and watch TV all day, or choose something fulfilling and 'productive.' Then we have to redefine productive, some other comments in this thread speak about that.
irremediable 11y ago
> So basically as a middle class person, I don't benefit at all, I may even lose money, but some kid who has no income and wants to live in his parents basement gets $10k/yr for contributing nothing to society? Am I understanding this correctly? The benefit for you is that you'd be living in a better society. Hopefully, you'd see reductions in crime, improvements in various service jobs, etc. That kid gets $10k/year, sure, but then again lots of people already have the means to live in their parents' basements. Most of them prefer not to do so. However, there'll be other people getting that $10k/year. Single mothers could spend more time with their children. More people would become educated. The job market would become more liquid for employees, hopefully improving working conditions.

soared 11y ago

The idea is that the taxes scale, so for the middle class the tax is negligible. You get $10k, and your taxes are increased by $12k if you're making less than $100k. As for teenagers sitting in their parents basement - The thought is that $10k lets them live and do anything they please instead of being tied to a shitty job or their parents basement. In theory they will choose to contribute to society in some way and not just play video games all day. But that is what we need to test - Will people choose to play video games and watch TV all day, or choose something fulfilling and 'productive.' Then we have to redefine productive, some other comments in this thread speak about that.

irremediable 11y ago

> So basically as a middle class person, I don't benefit at all, I may even lose money, but some kid who has no income and wants to live in his parents basement gets $10k/yr for contributing nothing to society? Am I understanding this correctly? The benefit for you is that you'd be living in a better society. Hopefully, you'd see reductions in crime, improvements in various service jobs, etc. That kid gets $10k/year, sure, but then again lots of people already have the means to live in their parents' basements. Most of them prefer not to do so. However, there'll be other people getting that $10k/year. Single mothers could spend more time with their children. More people would become educated. The job market would become more liquid for employees, hopefully improving working conditions.