13 ms·

During Brexit, people in job-starved areas of UK were reported as resentful for receiving handouts. They wanted gainful employment and their dignity back. You c

by dzink 10y ago

During Brexit, people in job-starved areas of UK were reported as resentful for receiving handouts. They wanted gainful employment and their dignity back. You could have corporations foot the bill for basic income and people with certain values would still not want it. The image of being a breadwinner is so deeply instilled in some people that for them not being that, triggers mid-life-crisis: a depression, sense of meaningless existence, addiction, etc. Employment's bigger role is not just to provide income, but to keep people's minds busy and balance dopamine and add more meaning in their life. We have to provide solutions for all of the pieces of the puzzle if we want rapid automation.

ng12 10y ago
And when they voiced anger about the government accepting immigrants when there already wasn't enough work to go around they got called racist. I think UBI's effect on immigration is an interesting topic and one I don't see discussed in most articles. What does it mean to be a citizen of a country when, statistically speaking, you're a drain on the economy? How does immigration fit into that model? In my mind UBI doesn't require changing how we view work, it requires changing how we view citizenship and statecraft.
- gotofritz 10y ago
  > And when they voiced anger about the government accepting immigrants when there already wasn't enough work to go around they got called racist. That's because the evidence points at them being racists
- chris_va 10y ago
  I think your explanation on the racist name calling shows why this is such a difficult topic. There is a incorrect assumption that people often make, without malice, about economics being a zero sum game. It really is not, almost by definition. The more people in an area, usually the more opportunity people have for employment over a long time period, and the higher the economic output. Also, there is a difference between refugees (i.e. people who might otherwise die) and economic immigrants. It's hard to fault someone for their perception that other people might take their jobs, correct or not. It is easier to fault someone for taking the same stance when the alternative for the immigrants is potentially far more catastrophic. Especially when the arguments are more about culture and race than employment.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    > taking the same stance when the alternative for the immigrants is potentially far more catastrophic refugees also tend to be better off economically in coming to the US. There are a lot of people in the world that can be saved from death by granting them asylum, but who don't get it. To what extent can, and should, the US help the world outside its borders?
ako 10y ago
Creating jobs is one thing, but creating meaningful jobs is something completely different. In communistic days in eastern europe, everyone was employed, but most people had a lousy job, that involved very little effort. The first time i came to the US, i got the same feeling, lots of meaningless jobs (lift boy, parking lot attendant, grocery store bag filler) that i didn't see in the Netherlands. Are these meaningless jobs really better than universal basic income? At least with UBI people can decide for themselves how they create a meaningful daily activity.
- ycmbntrthrwaway 10y ago
  Street promoters make me sad. If they can find no job they better stay at home and learn something new, but they have no time for it, so they are stuck doing useless, maybe even harmful, work.
  - dbg31415 10y ago
    I've met someone who spun a sign for a living... he was a huge stoner... I love weed, but he clearly smoked too much of it while his brain was still developing and he could barely hold a conversation... Now... maybe he was self-medicating or whatever... but the point was he failed out of high school, failed out of a few jobs... and then ended up spinning a sign because he really had no meaningful skill to contribute to society. (And I think he failed at showing up to work so he lost that job eventually...) I suspect most people who are in really shit jobs are there because they have issues... they can't show up on time, they don't follow employment rules, or they have something just wrong with them (they are sex-offenders, or have untreated behavioral issues or whatever)... not the sort of people who should be empowered to just sit around. I will go so far as to say nobody who really has potential ends up spinning a sign for very long... they use the job to cover their rent, and they find a way to get a better job. Anyway I don't want to come off as against a UBI, I but I've never met someone who benefited by sitting around doing nothing. I think it's bad for people to be lazy -- like fundamentally brain-rotting to sit around being idle. I like the idea of a UBI that's tied to doing something... anything... getting outside and picking up trash in the road ditches even... or getting vocational training (which we should find a way to make free)... or getting mental health treatment... Prove you have a regular paycheck, or prove you are clocking in 30 hours at some "just move your body" type of approved activity every week to qualify.
chriskanan 10y ago
I think that's one of the biggest open questions with UBI. What percent of people would use UBI to do productive or self-improving works vs those that solely play video games, watch TV, and feel like life is meaningless? I think psychologically, people need something to do with themselves. However, a counter argument is that many of the people that UBI may benefit the most might have jobs that they loathe. I'd love to see a review of the impact of work and UBI on human psychological well-being. This is definitely not one-to-one, but it would be interesting to study people that inherited fortunes so they would never need to work. How many chose a life of leisure? For those that did, what is their mental health like? That population is much more privileged and probably better educated than the average citizen that would get UBI, but I think it might give some clues.
- monk_e_boy 10y ago
  When I was made unemployed, it was the lack of money that made me feel undignified. I couldn't feed my kids and had to as for handouts. UBI would have been amazing. I would have spent the money on food, shelter and heating. I would have spent the time writing software and trying to start a company.
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    There are absolutely people like you, and absolutely people who will just play WoW all day, every day. The question is, how many of each?
    - braveo 10y ago
      why does it matter? The point of UBI is to allow people to do what they want.
      - akjainaj 10y ago
        What would happen if everybody left their jobs overnight and started playing WoW? Other than Blizzard having to open thousands of new realms. Of course not everybody will quit their job to play a videogame, but what if a significant % of workers were simply "lost" overnight?
gotofritz 10y ago
Maybe in future there can be some gamification of the whole thing, led by the government for the "common good" (although I wouldn't hold my breath). But I think giving meaning to people's life is a task beyond a government. Experience in Communist countries shows government should be kept as far away as possible from such tasks.
kome 10y ago
yep, let's buy them a Nintendo :) Seriously now: if they have money, it's up to them to find a meaning of life. Not having to work, doesn't mean you shouldn't work. You can help with old people, or educate the youth. You can work on some very non-profitable, but good and meaningful agricultural thing. You can fix your city. You can clean the street. You can work on open source software. You can build furniture. Giving money just to the poor is stigmatizing, and very bad for mental health as you pointed out. A universal measure would be very different tho.
sean_patel 10y ago
I couldn't get past the 1st line > Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen. If implemented, it will surely be a disaster in America (DOA - Dead on Arrival), considering how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system. Let me tell you a story. I was getting my beat up Honda Civic in SOMA last month, when a black dude rolled up in a Mercedes-Benz and paid cash to the owner for some work done earlier. After he left, I told the Mechanic "Wow, High roller huh?". To which the mechanic laughed. "Well. He lives in Bayshore (Bayshore is like Ghetto / Projects) in a nice 3-BR apt, pays only 300$ rent, and has 4 kids, because the more kids you have and are un-employed, the more hand-outs the govt gives in terms of food stamps and stuff, and the less they charge for rent." He said it gets even better for "single moms", so women who are single moms deliberately choose to not marry their new dude, despite being with him for several years, since they'll lose the "benefits" from the government. In short, American are inherently lazy and will "work the system" any which way they can. I see the people getting high on weed with free $ from the Goverment and not doing anything to become gainfully employed again. [ I know the PC-Police here at HN will downvote and flag me into oblivion, but this is the ground reality in America ]
- chc 10y ago
  Generalizing second-hand anecdotes from somebody who obviously has an axe to grind into racist fantasies is not a very good way to determine "the ground reality."
- striking 10y ago
  You have hearsay about one person, and generalize that across 1) an entire race and 2) all of America. Downvoting you isn't even about political correctness for me. It's that your group size is too small to lead to any sort of substantive discussion. There are a lot of people that abuse these systems, and a lot of honest people that don't. Maybe you should find some real data before jumping to conclusions?
- coldtea 10y ago
  >If implemented, it will surely be a disaster in America (DOA - Dead on Arrival), considering how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system. Oh, couldn't be bothered to read the number breakdown AND racist to boot. What do you know about "how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system" apart from what some biased media tell you and/or a few anecdotal stories?
cmurf 10y ago
It's really a need to feel useful. If we permit politicians to conflate a specific manifestation of that need as being a want for gainful employment, we will end up with protectionism. We will see laws prohibiting certain kinds of automation. And we will see a fight between different classes as one class feels entitled to work, and another class feels entitled to save money on labor.
kakeadw5481 10y ago
I would agree with you if the perception that UBI is equivalent of handouts, which UBI specifically isnt. Think of it like this, if every citizen is getting money regardless of their employment status and that this is essentially a perk of being a citizen and paying your taxes, the negative stigma would not be there per se. Eventually , people will start seeing this as an additional benefits similar to healthcare being provided by state. One of the crucial points while introducing UBI would be education both of the populace being helped and the populace at large since you may not be able to introduce it through out the country at one go.
lg 10y ago
I don't know about the UK, but in the US, you effectively have a choice between getting welfare and working. So people have the option to take some low-paying job, but they don't do it because then they lose welfare benefits that pay almost as much, sometimes subsidizing childcare etc. so it's an unemployment trap. UBI is much saner because you get it in addition to any income you earn from working, so you can go ahead and take that low-paying job as well.
- TheSageMage 10y ago
  This is an earned income tax credit(https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit/eitc-earned-income-tax-credit-questions-and-answers https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-in...). Personally I could get behind the "lower federal minimum wages regulations" if it were met with a "but increase a EITC to help tweak the income of those who need help".
- swift 10y ago
  I think you know, but just to clarify for others: it is easily possible in the US to be in a situation where increasing the number of hours you work or accepting a job that pays more will paradoxically reduce your income: http://www.learnliberty.org/blog/the-welfare-cliff-and-why-many-low-income-workers-will-never-overcome-poverty/ http://www.learnliberty.org/blog/the-welfare-cliff-and-why-m...
- keithnz 10y ago
  this is the key point, getting a benefit, you are restricted in what you can do and you get problems as soon as you earn any extra money.... getting a UBI, which everyone gets, is different, you are free to do as much extra as you like. There are no requirements to show you are looking for work, meeting with welfare agencies etc etc. Benefits have a large negative stigma. People try to earn extra all hush hush / secret with large negative consequences if caught. However, UBI does have some challenges. Current benefit systems try to adapt to each individuals situations, UBI is blind to individual circumstances.
- jimnotgym 10y ago
  This is exactly the same in the UK, particularly with housing benefit
escape_goat 10y ago
A basic income distributed to everyone wouldn't carry the same stigma as "handouts." Those people wouldn't stop wanting jobs, I agree. They're not going to be satisfied to just be on the dole, and net taxpayer status will probably matter a lot to them. But the basic income would provide them with a fundamental level of security and mobility. It would keep money pumping steadily into the local economy. Small-time entrepreneurs would be able to take small-time risks; small corner-store businesses would be able to prosper. A worker would be able risk leaving a job, and training for a new one; they won't get stuck filling half of their potential just to keep their children in clothing. A more flexible workforce should lower a barrier to new investment in the region. Mobility for the higher achievers would mean more opportunity for those who just want to come in, punch the clock, check out and have a beer.
AnthonyMouse 10y ago
> They wanted gainful employment and their dignity back. That is in fact what a basic income allows, because it allows you to eliminate the minimum wage. Then anyone who wants a job can have it, because they are allowed to accept the wages employers are actually willing to pay, and in combination with the basic income still have enough to live.
closeparen 10y ago
What could be less dignified than working a job you are empirically inferior for because you got your competition banned? That doing automatable busywork by hand is somehow more dignified than receiving handouts is an absurd idea (it's just as much a handout, only in this case you have to jump through hoops for it). That others people should be required to do automatable busywork to receive their handouts is a cruel and borderline evil idea.
Clubber 10y ago
This is one of the main theories as to why Trump was successful in the US. The US economy can't properly support it's workforce fully. The Democrats offered social safety net. The Republicans offered tax cuts and deregulation to the business owners. Neither solved the underlying problem that the US economy can't properly support the workforce. People want an honest day's pay for an honest day's work as they have for millennia. Pride in honest, good work is important to the vast majority of people, especially in the US.
- Idontagree 10y ago
  I just simply dont agree. I'd be perfectly happy to do what I pleased everyday if I could. I'm not a huge fan of having to meet deadlines or any of the many little tasks that come with having to work. I think it's truly strange that people are afraid of not having work because it means they will be listless.
JeremyNT 10y ago
UBI combined with single payer health care and a removal of the minimum wage addresses this problem. It's called "basic" for a reason; the idea is that people will continue to supplement it with work that they find enriching and rewarding. Whole new sorts of currently "worthless" work become possible when not shackled by a minimum wage.
2noame 10y ago
Universality removes stigma. As evidence, read this about Canada's Mincome experiment. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cars.12091/full http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cars.12091/full
kemiller 10y ago
There's a difference between means-tested handouts and basic income. Since everyone gets it, asic income might not have the same stigma.
tim333 10y ago
Basic income could help get rid of people sitting around unemployed. Instead of small amounts of earned income being effective taxed at near 100% by loss of benefits they might be able to keep it all making low paying work worth doing.
JamesBarney 10y ago
A UBI does not prevent anyone from getting work. It actually makes it easier to get work if you want to, because you don't have to compete against as many applicants because some of them would rather stay home and take care of their kids, or woodwork.
whytaka 10y ago
Which is great for UBI as the social contract makes explicit that everyone is a beneficiary of it. The people who need it then will have both their dignity and the will to make more of themselves.
sauronlord 10y ago
So "handing out jobs" would not breed resentment? It would for me (no one owes me anything). No one is stopping someone from providing services or goods to others

by dzink 10y ago

ng12 10y ago

And when they voiced anger about the government accepting immigrants when there already wasn't enough work to go around they got called racist. I think UBI's effect on immigration is an interesting topic and one I don't see discussed in most articles. What does it mean to be a citizen of a country when, statistically speaking, you're a drain on the economy? How does immigration fit into that model? In my mind UBI doesn't require changing how we view work, it requires changing how we view citizenship and statecraft.

gotofritz 10y ago
> And when they voiced anger about the government accepting immigrants when there already wasn't enough work to go around they got called racist. That's because the evidence points at them being racists
chris_va 10y ago
I think your explanation on the racist name calling shows why this is such a difficult topic. There is a incorrect assumption that people often make, without malice, about economics being a zero sum game. It really is not, almost by definition. The more people in an area, usually the more opportunity people have for employment over a long time period, and the higher the economic output. Also, there is a difference between refugees (i.e. people who might otherwise die) and economic immigrants. It's hard to fault someone for their perception that other people might take their jobs, correct or not. It is easier to fault someone for taking the same stance when the alternative for the immigrants is potentially far more catastrophic. Especially when the arguments are more about culture and race than employment.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  > taking the same stance when the alternative for the immigrants is potentially far more catastrophic refugees also tend to be better off economically in coming to the US. There are a lot of people in the world that can be saved from death by granting them asylum, but who don't get it. To what extent can, and should, the US help the world outside its borders?

ako 10y ago

Creating jobs is one thing, but creating meaningful jobs is something completely different. In communistic days in eastern europe, everyone was employed, but most people had a lousy job, that involved very little effort. The first time i came to the US, i got the same feeling, lots of meaningless jobs (lift boy, parking lot attendant, grocery store bag filler) that i didn't see in the Netherlands. Are these meaningless jobs really better than universal basic income? At least with UBI people can decide for themselves how they create a meaningful daily activity.

ycmbntrthrwaway 10y ago
Street promoters make me sad. If they can find no job they better stay at home and learn something new, but they have no time for it, so they are stuck doing useless, maybe even harmful, work.
- dbg31415 10y ago
  I've met someone who spun a sign for a living... he was a huge stoner... I love weed, but he clearly smoked too much of it while his brain was still developing and he could barely hold a conversation... Now... maybe he was self-medicating or whatever... but the point was he failed out of high school, failed out of a few jobs... and then ended up spinning a sign because he really had no meaningful skill to contribute to society. (And I think he failed at showing up to work so he lost that job eventually...) I suspect most people who are in really shit jobs are there because they have issues... they can't show up on time, they don't follow employment rules, or they have something just wrong with them (they are sex-offenders, or have untreated behavioral issues or whatever)... not the sort of people who should be empowered to just sit around. I will go so far as to say nobody who really has potential ends up spinning a sign for very long... they use the job to cover their rent, and they find a way to get a better job. Anyway I don't want to come off as against a UBI, I but I've never met someone who benefited by sitting around doing nothing. I think it's bad for people to be lazy -- like fundamentally brain-rotting to sit around being idle. I like the idea of a UBI that's tied to doing something... anything... getting outside and picking up trash in the road ditches even... or getting vocational training (which we should find a way to make free)... or getting mental health treatment... Prove you have a regular paycheck, or prove you are clocking in 30 hours at some "just move your body" type of approved activity every week to qualify.

chriskanan 10y ago

I think that's one of the biggest open questions with UBI. What percent of people would use UBI to do productive or self-improving works vs those that solely play video games, watch TV, and feel like life is meaningless? I think psychologically, people need something to do with themselves. However, a counter argument is that many of the people that UBI may benefit the most might have jobs that they loathe. I'd love to see a review of the impact of work and UBI on human psychological well-being. This is definitely not one-to-one, but it would be interesting to study people that inherited fortunes so they would never need to work. How many chose a life of leisure? For those that did, what is their mental health like? That population is much more privileged and probably better educated than the average citizen that would get UBI, but I think it might give some clues.

monk_e_boy 10y ago
When I was made unemployed, it was the lack of money that made me feel undignified. I couldn't feed my kids and had to as for handouts. UBI would have been amazing. I would have spent the money on food, shelter and heating. I would have spent the time writing software and trying to start a company.
- TulliusCicero 10y ago
  There are absolutely people like you, and absolutely people who will just play WoW all day, every day. The question is, how many of each?
  - braveo 10y ago
    why does it matter? The point of UBI is to allow people to do what they want.
    - akjainaj 10y ago
      What would happen if everybody left their jobs overnight and started playing WoW? Other than Blizzard having to open thousands of new realms. Of course not everybody will quit their job to play a videogame, but what if a significant % of workers were simply "lost" overnight?

gotofritz 10y ago

Maybe in future there can be some gamification of the whole thing, led by the government for the "common good" (although I wouldn't hold my breath). But I think giving meaning to people's life is a task beyond a government. Experience in Communist countries shows government should be kept as far away as possible from such tasks.

kome 10y ago

yep, let's buy them a Nintendo :) Seriously now: if they have money, it's up to them to find a meaning of life. Not having to work, doesn't mean you shouldn't work. You can help with old people, or educate the youth. You can work on some very non-profitable, but good and meaningful agricultural thing. You can fix your city. You can clean the street. You can work on open source software. You can build furniture. Giving money just to the poor is stigmatizing, and very bad for mental health as you pointed out. A universal measure would be very different tho.

sean_patel 10y ago

I couldn't get past the 1st line > Consider for a moment that from this day forward, on the first day of every month, around $1,000 is deposited into your bank account – because you are a citizen. If implemented, it will surely be a disaster in America (DOA - Dead on Arrival), considering how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system. Let me tell you a story. I was getting my beat up Honda Civic in SOMA last month, when a black dude rolled up in a Mercedes-Benz and paid cash to the owner for some work done earlier. After he left, I told the Mechanic "Wow, High roller huh?". To which the mechanic laughed. "Well. He lives in Bayshore (Bayshore is like Ghetto / Projects) in a nice 3-BR apt, pays only 300$ rent, and has 4 kids, because the more kids you have and are un-employed, the more hand-outs the govt gives in terms of food stamps and stuff, and the less they charge for rent." He said it gets even better for "single moms", so women who are single moms deliberately choose to not marry their new dude, despite being with him for several years, since they'll lose the "benefits" from the government. In short, American are inherently lazy and will "work the system" any which way they can. I see the people getting high on weed with free $ from the Goverment and not doing anything to become gainfully employed again. [ I know the PC-Police here at HN will downvote and flag me into oblivion, but this is the ground reality in America ]

chc 10y ago
Generalizing second-hand anecdotes from somebody who obviously has an axe to grind into racist fantasies is not a very good way to determine "the ground reality."
striking 10y ago
You have hearsay about one person, and generalize that across 1) an entire race and 2) all of America. Downvoting you isn't even about political correctness for me. It's that your group size is too small to lead to any sort of substantive discussion. There are a lot of people that abuse these systems, and a lot of honest people that don't. Maybe you should find some real data before jumping to conclusions?
coldtea 10y ago
>If implemented, it will surely be a disaster in America (DOA - Dead on Arrival), considering how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system. Oh, couldn't be bothered to read the number breakdown AND racist to boot. What do you know about "how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system" apart from what some biased media tell you and/or a few anecdotal stories?

cmurf 10y ago

It's really a need to feel useful. If we permit politicians to conflate a specific manifestation of that need as being a want for gainful employment, we will end up with protectionism. We will see laws prohibiting certain kinds of automation. And we will see a fight between different classes as one class feels entitled to work, and another class feels entitled to save money on labor.

kakeadw5481 10y ago

I would agree with you if the perception that UBI is equivalent of handouts, which UBI specifically isnt. Think of it like this, if every citizen is getting money regardless of their employment status and that this is essentially a perk of being a citizen and paying your taxes, the negative stigma would not be there per se. Eventually , people will start seeing this as an additional benefits similar to healthcare being provided by state. One of the crucial points while introducing UBI would be education both of the populace being helped and the populace at large since you may not be able to introduce it through out the country at one go.

lg 10y ago

I don't know about the UK, but in the US, you effectively have a choice between getting welfare and working. So people have the option to take some low-paying job, but they don't do it because then they lose welfare benefits that pay almost as much, sometimes subsidizing childcare etc. so it's an unemployment trap. UBI is much saner because you get it in addition to any income you earn from working, so you can go ahead and take that low-paying job as well.

TheSageMage 10y ago
This is an earned income tax credit(https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit/eitc-earned-income-tax-credit-questions-and-answers https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-in...). Personally I could get behind the "lower federal minimum wages regulations" if it were met with a "but increase a EITC to help tweak the income of those who need help".
swift 10y ago
I think you know, but just to clarify for others: it is easily possible in the US to be in a situation where increasing the number of hours you work or accepting a job that pays more will paradoxically reduce your income: http://www.learnliberty.org/blog/the-welfare-cliff-and-why-many-low-income-workers-will-never-overcome-poverty/ http://www.learnliberty.org/blog/the-welfare-cliff-and-why-m...
keithnz 10y ago
this is the key point, getting a benefit, you are restricted in what you can do and you get problems as soon as you earn any extra money.... getting a UBI, which everyone gets, is different, you are free to do as much extra as you like. There are no requirements to show you are looking for work, meeting with welfare agencies etc etc. Benefits have a large negative stigma. People try to earn extra all hush hush / secret with large negative consequences if caught. However, UBI does have some challenges. Current benefit systems try to adapt to each individuals situations, UBI is blind to individual circumstances.
jimnotgym 10y ago
This is exactly the same in the UK, particularly with housing benefit

escape_goat 10y ago

A basic income distributed to everyone wouldn't carry the same stigma as "handouts." Those people wouldn't stop wanting jobs, I agree. They're not going to be satisfied to just be on the dole, and net taxpayer status will probably matter a lot to them. But the basic income would provide them with a fundamental level of security and mobility. It would keep money pumping steadily into the local economy. Small-time entrepreneurs would be able to take small-time risks; small corner-store businesses would be able to prosper. A worker would be able risk leaving a job, and training for a new one; they won't get stuck filling half of their potential just to keep their children in clothing. A more flexible workforce should lower a barrier to new investment in the region. Mobility for the higher achievers would mean more opportunity for those who just want to come in, punch the clock, check out and have a beer.

AnthonyMouse 10y ago

> They wanted gainful employment and their dignity back. That is in fact what a basic income allows, because it allows you to eliminate the minimum wage. Then anyone who wants a job can have it, because they are allowed to accept the wages employers are actually willing to pay, and in combination with the basic income still have enough to live.

closeparen 10y ago

What could be less dignified than working a job you are empirically inferior for because you got your competition banned? That doing automatable busywork by hand is somehow more dignified than receiving handouts is an absurd idea (it's just as much a handout, only in this case you have to jump through hoops for it). That others people should be required to do automatable busywork to receive their handouts is a cruel and borderline evil idea.

Clubber 10y ago

This is one of the main theories as to why Trump was successful in the US. The US economy can't properly support it's workforce fully. The Democrats offered social safety net. The Republicans offered tax cuts and deregulation to the business owners. Neither solved the underlying problem that the US economy can't properly support the workforce. People want an honest day's pay for an honest day's work as they have for millennia. Pride in honest, good work is important to the vast majority of people, especially in the US.

Idontagree 10y ago
I just simply dont agree. I'd be perfectly happy to do what I pleased everyday if I could. I'm not a huge fan of having to meet deadlines or any of the many little tasks that come with having to work. I think it's truly strange that people are afraid of not having work because it means they will be listless.

JeremyNT 10y ago

UBI combined with single payer health care and a removal of the minimum wage addresses this problem. It's called "basic" for a reason; the idea is that people will continue to supplement it with work that they find enriching and rewarding. Whole new sorts of currently "worthless" work become possible when not shackled by a minimum wage.

2noame 10y ago

Universality removes stigma. As evidence, read this about Canada's Mincome experiment. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cars.12091/full http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cars.12091/full

kemiller 10y ago

There's a difference between means-tested handouts and basic income. Since everyone gets it, asic income might not have the same stigma.

tim333 10y ago

Basic income could help get rid of people sitting around unemployed. Instead of small amounts of earned income being effective taxed at near 100% by loss of benefits they might be able to keep it all making low paying work worth doing.

JamesBarney 10y ago

A UBI does not prevent anyone from getting work. It actually makes it easier to get work if you want to, because you don't have to compete against as many applicants because some of them would rather stay home and take care of their kids, or woodwork.

whytaka 10y ago

Which is great for UBI as the social contract makes explicit that everyone is a beneficiary of it. The people who need it then will have both their dignity and the will to make more of themselves.

sauronlord 10y ago

So "handing out jobs" would not breed resentment? It would for me (no one owes me anything). No one is stopping someone from providing services or goods to others