5 ms·

I see lots of good arguments for a basic income, and I'm somewhat convinced that it could do much good, but these questions keep bothering me: 1. What percent

I see lots of good arguments for a basic income, and I'm somewhat convinced that it could do much good, but these questions keep bothering me: 1. What percent of the population will just take their guaranteed income and do drugs/play video games/party all day, instead of being ambitious? 2. What will be the cultural effects of a large segment of the population living a life devoid of duty and consequences? 3. Will we allow these overgrown children to vote? And what would they possibly vote for except a bigger basic income and more freebies? And if you did restrict the franchise, then what incentive will the franchised class have to rule for the benefit of the disenfranchised? 4. Won't this new underclass reproduce much more rapidly than the productive class? Again, what are the social consequences of this? 5. How do you reconcile a basic income with open immigration, which we seem to be moving towards? A basic income in the US would probably be greater than the yearly income of most working people in the world.

binalpatel 10y ago
What if there's an explosion of risk taking and creativity? What if anyone who ever wanted to start a business, goes for it, instead of taking a stable job because they're free to do so? We won't know what'll happen till we see it in the real world, but please don't shoe-horn it into "overgrown children playing video games all day".
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  >We won't know what'll happen till we see it in the real world, but please don't shoe-horn it into "overgrown children playing video games all day". That's not an encouraging stance to take if you're trying to convince people to undertake a massive and irreversible social experiment that would fundamentally alter our society.
  - vinay427 10y ago
    That's what limited trials are for. Obviously it's difficult to fully simulate an entirely basic income-based society but it's better than nothing.
projektir 10y ago
None of these issues are somehow new or specific to basic income. The things you are afraid of to me sound a lot better than what we currently have. I'd much rather someone was playing video games all day than working at a minimum wage job.
mordocai 10y ago
> 5. How do you reconcile a basic income with open immigration, which we seem to be moving towards? A basic income in the US would probably be greater than the yearly income of most working people in the world. Surely only citizens would get basic income? If an immigrant wants it, they'll have to become a naturalized citizen which takes enough effort that they probably deserve it.
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  That would make it impossible for immigrants to house and feed themselves, with the market adapted for everyone making a basic income.
  - mordocai 10y ago
    Ideally this wouldn't happen, but with our current amount of regulation you are probably right that it would happen. In any case, legal immigrants sound okay to me. Obviously illegal immigrants aren't going to get it.
    - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
      If everybody doesn't get it (the BI) you just create a new indentured class. Illegal immigrants don't get here without the cooperation of some citizens. Its an industry. Which will flourish as the gap between laborers and citizens widens (with a BI)
- MrZongle2 10y ago
  "Surely only citizens would get basic income?" At first? Probably. Eventually? No. It is too ripe of a target for pandering politicians.
  - _0ffh 10y ago
    You mean politicians pandering to non-citizens who do not have the right to vote?
darawk 10y ago
> 1. What percent of the population will just take their guaranteed income and do drugs/play video games/party all day, instead of being ambitious? To a great extent, that doesn't matter. Many people will choose to do that, but that is ok. Three things will happen: 1. Wages will rise until they are attracted into jobs. 2. Rents required to live a basic life will go up to partially (but not completely) offset the effect of the basic income 3. These people who are just living off the UBI will still be generating demand. Which, in a society characterized by extreme supply efficiency, is the side of the equation that needs to be stimulated. Their economic contribution will be spending their UBI on things they want. > 2. What will be the cultural effects of a large segment of the population living a life devoid of duty and consequences? We already have people who largely do this. We won't be creating something new, we'll just be expanding it a bit, and raising their quality of life. This may end up having a negative effect, but I kind of doubt it personally. But this can only really be answered via experimentation. > 3. Will we allow these overgrown children to vote? And what would they possibly vote for except a bigger basic income and more freebies? And if you did restrict the franchise, then what incentive will the franchised class have to rule for the benefit of the disenfranchised? That's an interesting question. I'd say yes, but keep in mind that everyone will receive the basic income, whether they're working or not. As of right now, people on welfare are allowed to vote, and for the most part that seems to be working out ok (some may disagree here, though). > 4. Won't this new underclass reproduce much more rapidly than the productive class? Again, what are the social consequences of this? I'd say no. It seems to be the case that when people become wealthier they reproduce less. It's unclear why that is exactly, but it just seems to happen that way. > 5. How do you reconcile a basic income with open immigration, which we seem to be moving towards? A basic income in the US would probably be greater than the yearly income of most working people in the world. Maybe a policy like you have to work for X years before receiving it? That'd actually be an interesting replacement for immigrations policy. Open borders, but you don't get social services until you've been here employed productively for say, 5 years.
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  >We already have people who largely do this. We won't be creating something new, we'll just be expanding it a bit, and raising their quality of life. I think that "expanding it a bit" is understatement. >As of right now, people on welfare are allowed to vote, and for the most part that seems to be working out ok (some may disagree here, though). Is it working? The unsustainable budgets of all Western countries seem to suggest otherwise. The collapse in family stability and the workforce participation rate since the introduction of the welfare state also suggest otherwise. The rational behavior for someone who collects of significant portion of their income from welfare is to always vote for more welfare. It is almost always in their short- to medium- term interests, and in the long run we're all dead anyway. >I'd say no. It seems to be the case that when people become wealthier they reproduce less. It's unclear why that is exactly, but it just seems to happen that way. Richer people have less kids because it's extremely expensive and time consuming to raise kids the way they'd want to, investing heavily into their educations and life experiences, going to PTA meetings, being involved with school activities, etc. I don't think this logic applies to people that are collecting checks for doing nothing. >Open borders, but you don't get social services until you've been here employed productively for say, 5 years. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, that would be totally unworkable. If the basic income is to become law, then everyone living in the country would have to receive it. If everyone else is pocketing twenty grand a year for doing nothing, then it's going to be impossible for immigrants to afford to live here without that same free money. Much in the way that it's become very difficult for single-earner households, since most households now have two earners.
dllthomas 10y ago
> 1. What percent of the population will just take their guaranteed income and do drugs/play video games/party all day, instead of being ambitious? This probably depends quite a bit on just what level the income was set to.

binalpatel 10y ago

What if there's an explosion of risk taking and creativity? What if anyone who ever wanted to start a business, goes for it, instead of taking a stable job because they're free to do so? We won't know what'll happen till we see it in the real world, but please don't shoe-horn it into "overgrown children playing video games all day".

marcoperaza 10y ago
>We won't know what'll happen till we see it in the real world, but please don't shoe-horn it into "overgrown children playing video games all day". That's not an encouraging stance to take if you're trying to convince people to undertake a massive and irreversible social experiment that would fundamentally alter our society.
- vinay427 10y ago
  That's what limited trials are for. Obviously it's difficult to fully simulate an entirely basic income-based society but it's better than nothing.

projektir 10y ago

None of these issues are somehow new or specific to basic income. The things you are afraid of to me sound a lot better than what we currently have. I'd much rather someone was playing video games all day than working at a minimum wage job.

mordocai 10y ago

> 5. How do you reconcile a basic income with open immigration, which we seem to be moving towards? A basic income in the US would probably be greater than the yearly income of most working people in the world. Surely only citizens would get basic income? If an immigrant wants it, they'll have to become a naturalized citizen which takes enough effort that they probably deserve it.

marcoperaza 10y ago
That would make it impossible for immigrants to house and feed themselves, with the market adapted for everyone making a basic income.
- mordocai 10y ago
  Ideally this wouldn't happen, but with our current amount of regulation you are probably right that it would happen. In any case, legal immigrants sound okay to me. Obviously illegal immigrants aren't going to get it.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    If everybody doesn't get it (the BI) you just create a new indentured class. Illegal immigrants don't get here without the cooperation of some citizens. Its an industry. Which will flourish as the gap between laborers and citizens widens (with a BI)
MrZongle2 10y ago
"Surely only citizens would get basic income?" At first? Probably. Eventually? No. It is too ripe of a target for pandering politicians.
- _0ffh 10y ago
  You mean politicians pandering to non-citizens who do not have the right to vote?

darawk 10y ago

> 1. What percent of the population will just take their guaranteed income and do drugs/play video games/party all day, instead of being ambitious? To a great extent, that doesn't matter. Many people will choose to do that, but that is ok. Three things will happen: 1. Wages will rise until they are attracted into jobs. 2. Rents required to live a basic life will go up to partially (but not completely) offset the effect of the basic income 3. These people who are just living off the UBI will still be generating demand. Which, in a society characterized by extreme supply efficiency, is the side of the equation that needs to be stimulated. Their economic contribution will be spending their UBI on things they want. > 2. What will be the cultural effects of a large segment of the population living a life devoid of duty and consequences? We already have people who largely do this. We won't be creating something new, we'll just be expanding it a bit, and raising their quality of life. This may end up having a negative effect, but I kind of doubt it personally. But this can only really be answered via experimentation. > 3. Will we allow these overgrown children to vote? And what would they possibly vote for except a bigger basic income and more freebies? And if you did restrict the franchise, then what incentive will the franchised class have to rule for the benefit of the disenfranchised? That's an interesting question. I'd say yes, but keep in mind that everyone will receive the basic income, whether they're working or not. As of right now, people on welfare are allowed to vote, and for the most part that seems to be working out ok (some may disagree here, though). > 4. Won't this new underclass reproduce much more rapidly than the productive class? Again, what are the social consequences of this? I'd say no. It seems to be the case that when people become wealthier they reproduce less. It's unclear why that is exactly, but it just seems to happen that way. > 5. How do you reconcile a basic income with open immigration, which we seem to be moving towards? A basic income in the US would probably be greater than the yearly income of most working people in the world. Maybe a policy like you have to work for X years before receiving it? That'd actually be an interesting replacement for immigrations policy. Open borders, but you don't get social services until you've been here employed productively for say, 5 years.

marcoperaza 10y ago
>We already have people who largely do this. We won't be creating something new, we'll just be expanding it a bit, and raising their quality of life. I think that "expanding it a bit" is understatement. >As of right now, people on welfare are allowed to vote, and for the most part that seems to be working out ok (some may disagree here, though). Is it working? The unsustainable budgets of all Western countries seem to suggest otherwise. The collapse in family stability and the workforce participation rate since the introduction of the welfare state also suggest otherwise. The rational behavior for someone who collects of significant portion of their income from welfare is to always vote for more welfare. It is almost always in their short- to medium- term interests, and in the long run we're all dead anyway. >I'd say no. It seems to be the case that when people become wealthier they reproduce less. It's unclear why that is exactly, but it just seems to happen that way. Richer people have less kids because it's extremely expensive and time consuming to raise kids the way they'd want to, investing heavily into their educations and life experiences, going to PTA meetings, being involved with school activities, etc. I don't think this logic applies to people that are collecting checks for doing nothing. >Open borders, but you don't get social services until you've been here employed productively for say, 5 years. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, that would be totally unworkable. If the basic income is to become law, then everyone living in the country would have to receive it. If everyone else is pocketing twenty grand a year for doing nothing, then it's going to be impossible for immigrants to afford to live here without that same free money. Much in the way that it's become very difficult for single-earner households, since most households now have two earners.

dllthomas 10y ago

> 1. What percent of the population will just take their guaranteed income and do drugs/play video games/party all day, instead of being ambitious? This probably depends quite a bit on just what level the income was set to.