3 ms·
Depends which BI fans you ask. The ones who want to completely eliminate other welfare programs are generally right-wing and/or libertarian - they're opposed to
by azernik 10y ago
Depends which BI fans you ask. The ones who want to completely eliminate other welfare programs are generally right-wing and/or libertarian - they're opposed to existing welfare programs for all kinds of ideological reasons. Left-wing BI fans (like me) are not so gung-ho about eliminating other welfare systems for the reasons you described, and I at least am totally willing to accept that BI will cost money.
That said, I do think there are some welfare items that can be eliminated, namely those that provide an income guarantee rather than a safety net against catastrophic expenses. So for example, section 8 and food stamps might be phased out under a BI system (they're always going to get next month's or week's deposit), but I think government-subsidized healthcare should not be.
WRT things like the car breakdown case you described... I think that's a gray area? With a few very big exceptions (people with disabilities or living in rural areas) the lack of a car is mainly a catastrophic issue because it endangers jobs. If the person has a basic living standard guaranteed, the urgency goes down, and I think you can just say "tough shit, save up until you can afford the repair". But I do think that there has to be a social safety net for people for whom a greater variety of big-ticket outlays are essential.
- xienze 10y ago> So for example, section 8 and food stamps might be phased out under a BI system (they're always going to get next month's or week's deposit) But my point is, when you hand someone a check and they must in turn be responsible for spending that money on food and shelter, they might not actually do that and then what? At least with Section 8 and food stamps you're earmarking the money for a particular purpose so as to make it much harder for the money to not be used the way it was intended. > WRT things like the car breakdown case you described... Keep in mind "my car broke down" is a metaphor for any unexpected event that impacts someone financially (and commonly as an excuse for "I spent my money foolishly and now I'm broke"), so I didn't mean for that to be some single concrete case I wanted a specific answer for. But again, if we decide that we need to help someone on BI who had some particular financial hardship beyond what their check allows for, how do we police that?
- azernik 10y agoIf someone has that much difficulty managing money, I think social services need to get involved and take some control over the person's decisions away from them. I just don't think that should be the default.
- st3v3r 10y agoKeep in mind that, under many current programs, you are not allowed to have savings. If you do not use all of your welfare money, then you get your benefits cut. If you have too much in your savings account, then you get your benefits cut. So it's not so simple as to say they have difficulty managing money, it's that they are not allowed to do many of the things you'd associate with successful money managing.
- azernik 10y agoUnder many current basic income programs, or just under other welfare programs? My impression of basic income schemes is that they are universal - they don't care if you're a millionaire, you still get your $30K per year.
- imtringued 10y agoIf that's the case how do they expect anyone to get out of poverty?
- 10y ago