5 ms·

At a cost of $24 trillion? Ha! 250m[1] * $1000 * 8 * 12 = $24,000,000,000,000 1. http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/99-total-population-by-child-and-

At a cost of $24 trillion? Ha! 250m[1] * $1000 * 8 * 12 = $24,000,000,000,000 1. http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/99-total-population-by-child-and-adult#detailed/1/any/false/870,573,869,36,868/39,40,41/416,417 http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/99-total-populat...

atonse 9y ago
What's the 8 for? 250m * 1000 * 12 = $3 trillion.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  The 8 years that the growth in the headline takes.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- alextheparrot 9y ago
  The original growth number is over 8 years
rbanffy 9y ago
If you increase taxation at the top ranges (and close loopholes the very rich and their corporate personas use to evade taxes and so on) you'll end up just injecting those trillions back into the economy. If you use that to replace means-tested aid, you get rid of the management overhead. And, maybe, if the US cuts costs for the military, making them build roads and schools instead of bombing them, you'll realize you really didn't need to spend that much in the military anyway... There is also an important point in terms of opportunities lost due to low surplus. As you reduce the pressure on the poor, they will end up making better decisions (http://thepsychreport.com/research-application/featured-research/the-cognitive-burden-of-poverty/ http://thepsychreport.com/research-application/featured-rese...) with better overall outcomes.
- kazinator 9y ago
  > you'll end up just injecting those trillions back into the economy. Right; that is, whichever economy those rich folks choose to call home. :)
  - atonse 9y ago
    Yeah ok. I call BS. Let's see all these millionaires move to Jersey (the island), or the Cayman Islands.
    - rbanffy 9y ago
      Then create laws to tax their money where it's earned.
  - nickthemagicman 9y ago
    There's been studies that found the rich don't leave a place due to taxes. I.E. California has one of the biggest economies in the world... http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/millionaire-migration.pdf http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/...
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      State and local taxes won't be deductible from federal taxes under the new Trump tax plan. The story is going to be rather different in that situation, I would bet.
    - arcticbull 9y ago
      Makes sense, if you’re already wealthy then you pick where to live based on where you want to live. Optimizing based on taxes seems cheap, I’d imagine they’d rather solve that by making more money. Plus it’s not like US citizens have much choice, they have to pay the IRS no matter where you live in the world forever. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide haha.
      - 9y ago
mattmanser 9y ago
If everyone's being paid $1000 per month more, you'd expect all jobs to pay less, and the profits from companies used to pay for it.
- chrishacken 9y ago
  So then essentially everyone would make the same they are now; thus resulting in little to no-change. When it's all said and done, having a $1000/m basic income would be little different than increasing the minimum wage by the same amount.
  - colomon 9y ago
    That's not even close to true, because increasing the minimum wage 1) only affects people who have jobs 2) will cause some of those people to lose their jobs. $1000/m basic income is a vastly better solution because everyone at the bottom will be helped.
  - xena 9y ago
    Except employers pay less, which would help make them stop complaining about wages costing too much.
  - mattmanser 9y ago
    There's nowhere near 100% employment. The whole point of this is to bring everyone up and make the social care system simpler.
matt_wulfeck 9y ago
The first rule of UBI is you don’t talk about how to pay for it.
- vorotato 9y ago
  Nah, it's taxes. Pretty transparent really. They want to raise taxes and stimulate the economy instead of the opposite which has never ever worked.
md2be 9y ago
The authors are fools. Would the money just picked from the money tree? Increasing the money supply supply would result in an increase in housing inflation, just as it has now.
oneplane 9y ago
Don't forget that that money will also be spent on things, it doesn't just disappear, probably at least half of it comes back right where it came from while in the meantime making sure that those people in the USA that are currently living by third world standards are maybe getting closer to BRIC level of life.
- matt_wulfeck 9y ago
  There are already quite some levels of welfare here in the US, including food stamps, government healthcare, housing allowance, and welfare money. You’re much better off being poor in he US than the countries in your acronym.

atonse 9y ago

What's the 8 for? 250m * 1000 * 12 = $3 trillion.

maxerickson 9y ago
The 8 years that the growth in the headline takes.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
alextheparrot 9y ago
The original growth number is over 8 years

rbanffy 9y ago

If you increase taxation at the top ranges (and close loopholes the very rich and their corporate personas use to evade taxes and so on) you'll end up just injecting those trillions back into the economy. If you use that to replace means-tested aid, you get rid of the management overhead. And, maybe, if the US cuts costs for the military, making them build roads and schools instead of bombing them, you'll realize you really didn't need to spend that much in the military anyway... There is also an important point in terms of opportunities lost due to low surplus. As you reduce the pressure on the poor, they will end up making better decisions (http://thepsychreport.com/research-application/featured-research/the-cognitive-burden-of-poverty/ http://thepsychreport.com/research-application/featured-rese...) with better overall outcomes.

kazinator 9y ago
> you'll end up just injecting those trillions back into the economy. Right; that is, whichever economy those rich folks choose to call home. :)
- atonse 9y ago
  Yeah ok. I call BS. Let's see all these millionaires move to Jersey (the island), or the Cayman Islands.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    Then create laws to tax their money where it's earned.
- nickthemagicman 9y ago
  There's been studies that found the rich don't leave a place due to taxes. I.E. California has one of the biggest economies in the world... http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/millionaire-migration.pdf http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2011/02/documents/...
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    State and local taxes won't be deductible from federal taxes under the new Trump tax plan. The story is going to be rather different in that situation, I would bet.
  - arcticbull 9y ago
    Makes sense, if you’re already wealthy then you pick where to live based on where you want to live. Optimizing based on taxes seems cheap, I’d imagine they’d rather solve that by making more money. Plus it’s not like US citizens have much choice, they have to pay the IRS no matter where you live in the world forever. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide haha.
    - 9y ago

mattmanser 9y ago

If everyone's being paid $1000 per month more, you'd expect all jobs to pay less, and the profits from companies used to pay for it.

chrishacken 9y ago
So then essentially everyone would make the same they are now; thus resulting in little to no-change. When it's all said and done, having a $1000/m basic income would be little different than increasing the minimum wage by the same amount.
- colomon 9y ago
  That's not even close to true, because increasing the minimum wage 1) only affects people who have jobs 2) will cause some of those people to lose their jobs. $1000/m basic income is a vastly better solution because everyone at the bottom will be helped.
- xena 9y ago
  Except employers pay less, which would help make them stop complaining about wages costing too much.
- mattmanser 9y ago
  There's nowhere near 100% employment. The whole point of this is to bring everyone up and make the social care system simpler.

matt_wulfeck 9y ago

The first rule of UBI is you don’t talk about how to pay for it.

vorotato 9y ago
Nah, it's taxes. Pretty transparent really. They want to raise taxes and stimulate the economy instead of the opposite which has never ever worked.

md2be 9y ago

The authors are fools. Would the money just picked from the money tree? Increasing the money supply supply would result in an increase in housing inflation, just as it has now.

oneplane 9y ago

Don't forget that that money will also be spent on things, it doesn't just disappear, probably at least half of it comes back right where it came from while in the meantime making sure that those people in the USA that are currently living by third world standards are maybe getting closer to BRIC level of life.

matt_wulfeck 9y ago
There are already quite some levels of welfare here in the US, including food stamps, government healthcare, housing allowance, and welfare money. You’re much better off being poor in he US than the countries in your acronym.