6 ms·

Approximately $20,000 per person. $1000 a year would have made a nice universal basic income for the last 20 years.

by jaggederest 5y ago

marricks 5y ago
Sure, but you can't discount all the US jobs created for defense industry and mercenary corps /s
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  UBI would have generated those same jobs with new consumption! :) Just you know, jobs in service of productive things, and the Halliburtons might actually have to, gasp, compete.
- js2 5y ago
  I know you're being sarcastic, but it's pretty widely agreed for a very long time that defense spending is an inefficient way to create jobs. Here's an article from 1983: https://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/16/jobs/defense-spending-its-effect-on-jobs.html https://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/16/jobs/defense-spending-its... > According to the study, for every $1 billion spent by the Pentagon to buy goods and services, 28,000 jobs are created in the private sector. The same investment would create 32,000 jobs if spent on public transportation, 57,000 if used for personal consumption and 71,000 jobs if spent on education, the report contended.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lucb1e 5y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that wages are quite inflated in the USA and $1000/year is not a livable income (i.e. sufficient for cheap housing, cheap food, water, electricity, basic appliances like a fridge and washing machine, heating, and pretty much nothing else) even in Europe where I'm from. Or am I missing the point of a UBI?
- thechao 5y ago
  Discretionary income for a lot of families is — functionally — zero. The result is that any sort of financial issue becomes a devastating (possibly lifelong) burden. Most of these issues are single-occurrence and probably fall in the 200–500$ range. A 1000$ a year UBI would be life-changing for them. And by "them" I mean, like, 50% of the country. I'm in Texas, and the maximum amount of cash assistance possible — married parents, multiple kids, demonstrated need, is something like 83$ a month; I think, once?
  - lucb1e 5y ago
    > the maximum amount of cash assistance possible — married parents, multiple kids, demonstrated need, is something like 83$ a month; I think, once? Huh, but, then you basically die. You can't live with kids on $83 monthly, let alone one-time. Surely there's something else if you don't have a job?
    - Spooky23 5y ago
      That’s just cash benefits. Men and married couples by design don’t get most benefits. Most safety net assistance isn’t in cash. There’s a stigma associated with the cash handouts — people typically seek food, health and rent assistance.
  - jandrewrogers 5y ago
    Per the US BLS and Federal Reserve, the median discretionary household income is $1000 per month. That is after all ordinary expenses, not just necessary ones. There is a significant percentage of the US that has no discretionary income in any meaningful sense, and that is something we should be concerned about, but it is nowhere near 50%.
  - nostrademons 5y ago
    Assuming prices of necessities don't rise to capture that UBI. Which is a very real concern; when all your potential customers have an extra $1000/year, you raise your prices by $1000/year and suddenly you have $(1000 * # customers) extra per year and they're back where they started. To really fix poverty, you need to address shortages, particularly ones in basic necessities. If there's a housing unit available for everyone, landlords will have no leverage to raise rents. If there's a preschool for every kid, the cost of childcare won't go up. If there's a doctor (really a health insurer - the issue is monopolization of the customer channel) for everyone and you can switch easily, the cost of healthcare won't go up. If you give money to people and don't fix the underlying shortages, the price just adjusts to capture that money.
dane-pgp 5y ago
For comparison, here is an article about a couple managing to spend only $900 per year each on food: https://www.businessinsider.com/cheap-grocery-shopping-list-millennial-couple-2019-2?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/cheap-grocery-shopping-list-...
mrleinad 5y ago
If all that money was spent in the US, you'd have a much higher inflation. This is another way the US exports the dollar as a worldwide currency, and is able to print money without causing high inflation domestically.
- Retric 5y ago
  The money was mostly spent domestically, the US military wants domestic suppliers to minimize risks in an actual war. This means they is domestic manufacturing for everything from missiles to socks.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  Its a snall fraction if total economy, how would inflation be 'much' higher?
amatic 5y ago
Is there a brakedown of where does this money "spent on war" finaly go? Military personel salaries, rifles, tanks, airplanes, r&d?
SkyMarshal 5y ago
> $1000 a year would have made a nice universal basic income for the last 20 years. I think you mean per month, not year. The idea of UBI is to give everyone a subsistence income so they can devote themselves to skill development and career advancement, even/especially while caring for kids. $1000/year doesn't remotely accomplish that.
- Alupis 5y ago
  No, $20,000 per tax payer is $1,000 per year over the last 20 years we've been in Afghanistan. Which comes out to a whopping $83.33 per month. I think this just illustrates how expensive these UBI plans really are... particularly the ones that flaunt several thousand dollar payments to every tax payer per month.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    > I think this just illustrates how expensive these UBI plans really are... One thing to keep in mind is that this is half of the military budget, which is less than half of discretionary spending, which is much less than half of total federal spending. The other thing to keep in mind is that most of the UBI money would be immediately recaptured in income tax. Making it Universal keeps the logistics simpler, but a wealthy person should end up with little to negative extra money from a reasonable UBI implementation. > particularly the ones that flaunt several thousand dollar payments to every tax payer per month. Who's suggesting that much? And are they suggesting it for normal circumstances where people are able to work?
    - Alupis 5y ago
      > One thing to keep in mind is that this is half of the military budget Prior to "COVID Spending", the total US budget was $4.5 Trillion in 2019, of which 3.4 Trillion was from revenue, and nearly $1 Trillion was deficit spending[1]. In 2019, the total Military budget was a little above $700 Billion[2]. (these numbers also highlight the absurd levels of spending being contemplated in congress right now, 1.2 Trillion and another 3.4 Trillion - these are huge numbers). Sure, there's waste in the military budget, but majority of it is indeed well spent (we ask a lot of our armed forces these days, and that requires a lot of money, ie. you could not say, cut the military budget in half without severe consequences). For a UBI to make a significant impact on someone's life, it will need to be substantial (at least several hundred dollars per month). Cost of living, and therefore purchase power of that UBI varies wildly across the country, but even if we just keep things simple and pay every taxpayer (~144 million people[3]) $500 monthly, that total weighs in at 72 Billion Dollars every month, or $864 Billion annually. (again, just for tax payers) Some of that money will be recaptured in taxes (income taxes, which is absurd on a UBI, and sales taxes), but majority of it will end up directly in the economy. While good for the economy, that level of spending is just untenable long term for the federal government... and that's only for $500, an in-significant amount of money in major metropolitan areas such as San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, etc. Which is why many people are arguing for $2,000 monthly for all tax payers... and as you can see, the numbers just plain do not work. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_States_federal_budget https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_States_federal_bud... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spending-from-2000-to-2012/#:~:text=In%202019%20the%20United%20States,when%20adjusted%20to%202018%20dollars https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spend...). [3] https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/#:~:text=Stay%20Informed%20on%20Tax%20Policy%20Research%20and%20Analysis&text=In%202018%2C%20144.3%20million%20taxpayers,and%20Jobs%20Act%20(TCJA) https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income....
uxp100 5y ago
Some consider $1000 too low to be a real UBI, so $83 definitely wouldn’t count.
sudosysgen 5y ago
In another vein, it would have been cheaper to build a house, give a Ford Mustang, a tractor, and home appliances to every household in Afghanistan than to pay for the war there.
- chadcmulligan 5y ago
  Indeed, imagine if instead of the western war train came, the western supply train came to all these countries. It would be a different world.
MisterBastahrd 5y ago
If they had invested them in index funds, the average person would have $109K sitting there for them today.

Approximately $20,000 per person. $1000 a year would have made a nice universal basic income for the last 20 years.

marricks 5y ago

Sure, but you can't discount all the US jobs created for defense industry and mercenary corps /s

Ericson2314 5y ago
UBI would have generated those same jobs with new consumption! :) Just you know, jobs in service of productive things, and the Halliburtons might actually have to, gasp, compete.
js2 5y ago
I know you're being sarcastic, but it's pretty widely agreed for a very long time that defense spending is an inefficient way to create jobs. Here's an article from 1983: https://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/16/jobs/defense-spending-its-effect-on-jobs.html https://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/16/jobs/defense-spending-its... > According to the study, for every $1 billion spent by the Pentagon to buy goods and services, 28,000 jobs are created in the private sector. The same investment would create 32,000 jobs if spent on public transportation, 57,000 if used for personal consumption and 71,000 jobs if spent on education, the report contended.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

lucb1e 5y ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that wages are quite inflated in the USA and $1000/year is not a livable income (i.e. sufficient for cheap housing, cheap food, water, electricity, basic appliances like a fridge and washing machine, heating, and pretty much nothing else) even in Europe where I'm from. Or am I missing the point of a UBI?

thechao 5y ago
Discretionary income for a lot of families is — functionally — zero. The result is that any sort of financial issue becomes a devastating (possibly lifelong) burden. Most of these issues are single-occurrence and probably fall in the 200–500$ range. A 1000$ a year UBI would be life-changing for them. And by "them" I mean, like, 50% of the country. I'm in Texas, and the maximum amount of cash assistance possible — married parents, multiple kids, demonstrated need, is something like 83$ a month; I think, once?
- lucb1e 5y ago
  > the maximum amount of cash assistance possible — married parents, multiple kids, demonstrated need, is something like 83$ a month; I think, once? Huh, but, then you basically die. You can't live with kids on $83 monthly, let alone one-time. Surely there's something else if you don't have a job?
  - Spooky23 5y ago
    That’s just cash benefits. Men and married couples by design don’t get most benefits. Most safety net assistance isn’t in cash. There’s a stigma associated with the cash handouts — people typically seek food, health and rent assistance.
- jandrewrogers 5y ago
  Per the US BLS and Federal Reserve, the median discretionary household income is $1000 per month. That is after all ordinary expenses, not just necessary ones. There is a significant percentage of the US that has no discretionary income in any meaningful sense, and that is something we should be concerned about, but it is nowhere near 50%.
- nostrademons 5y ago
  Assuming prices of necessities don't rise to capture that UBI. Which is a very real concern; when all your potential customers have an extra $1000/year, you raise your prices by $1000/year and suddenly you have $(1000 * # customers) extra per year and they're back where they started. To really fix poverty, you need to address shortages, particularly ones in basic necessities. If there's a housing unit available for everyone, landlords will have no leverage to raise rents. If there's a preschool for every kid, the cost of childcare won't go up. If there's a doctor (really a health insurer - the issue is monopolization of the customer channel) for everyone and you can switch easily, the cost of healthcare won't go up. If you give money to people and don't fix the underlying shortages, the price just adjusts to capture that money.

dane-pgp 5y ago

For comparison, here is an article about a couple managing to spend only $900 per year each on food: https://www.businessinsider.com/cheap-grocery-shopping-list-millennial-couple-2019-2?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/cheap-grocery-shopping-list-...

mrleinad 5y ago

If all that money was spent in the US, you'd have a much higher inflation. This is another way the US exports the dollar as a worldwide currency, and is able to print money without causing high inflation domestically.

Retric 5y ago
The money was mostly spent domestically, the US military wants domestic suppliers to minimize risks in an actual war. This means they is domestic manufacturing for everything from missiles to socks.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
Its a snall fraction if total economy, how would inflation be 'much' higher?

amatic 5y ago

Is there a brakedown of where does this money "spent on war" finaly go? Military personel salaries, rifles, tanks, airplanes, r&d?

SkyMarshal 5y ago

> $1000 a year would have made a nice universal basic income for the last 20 years. I think you mean per month, not year. The idea of UBI is to give everyone a subsistence income so they can devote themselves to skill development and career advancement, even/especially while caring for kids. $1000/year doesn't remotely accomplish that.

Alupis 5y ago
No, $20,000 per tax payer is $1,000 per year over the last 20 years we've been in Afghanistan. Which comes out to a whopping $83.33 per month. I think this just illustrates how expensive these UBI plans really are... particularly the ones that flaunt several thousand dollar payments to every tax payer per month.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  > I think this just illustrates how expensive these UBI plans really are... One thing to keep in mind is that this is half of the military budget, which is less than half of discretionary spending, which is much less than half of total federal spending. The other thing to keep in mind is that most of the UBI money would be immediately recaptured in income tax. Making it Universal keeps the logistics simpler, but a wealthy person should end up with little to negative extra money from a reasonable UBI implementation. > particularly the ones that flaunt several thousand dollar payments to every tax payer per month. Who's suggesting that much? And are they suggesting it for normal circumstances where people are able to work?
  - Alupis 5y ago
    > One thing to keep in mind is that this is half of the military budget Prior to "COVID Spending", the total US budget was $4.5 Trillion in 2019, of which 3.4 Trillion was from revenue, and nearly $1 Trillion was deficit spending[1]. In 2019, the total Military budget was a little above $700 Billion[2]. (these numbers also highlight the absurd levels of spending being contemplated in congress right now, 1.2 Trillion and another 3.4 Trillion - these are huge numbers). Sure, there's waste in the military budget, but majority of it is indeed well spent (we ask a lot of our armed forces these days, and that requires a lot of money, ie. you could not say, cut the military budget in half without severe consequences). For a UBI to make a significant impact on someone's life, it will need to be substantial (at least several hundred dollars per month). Cost of living, and therefore purchase power of that UBI varies wildly across the country, but even if we just keep things simple and pay every taxpayer (~144 million people[3]) $500 monthly, that total weighs in at 72 Billion Dollars every month, or $864 Billion annually. (again, just for tax payers) Some of that money will be recaptured in taxes (income taxes, which is absurd on a UBI, and sales taxes), but majority of it will end up directly in the economy. While good for the economy, that level of spending is just untenable long term for the federal government... and that's only for $500, an in-significant amount of money in major metropolitan areas such as San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, etc. Which is why many people are arguing for $2,000 monthly for all tax payers... and as you can see, the numbers just plain do not work. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_States_federal_budget https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_States_federal_bud... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spending-from-2000-to-2012/#:~:text=In%202019%20the%20United%20States,when%20adjusted%20to%202018%20dollars https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spend...). [3] https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/#:~:text=Stay%20Informed%20on%20Tax%20Policy%20Research%20and%20Analysis&text=In%202018%2C%20144.3%20million%20taxpayers,and%20Jobs%20Act%20(TCJA) https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income....

uxp100 5y ago

Some consider $1000 too low to be a real UBI, so $83 definitely wouldn’t count.

sudosysgen 5y ago

In another vein, it would have been cheaper to build a house, give a Ford Mustang, a tractor, and home appliances to every household in Afghanistan than to pay for the war there.

chadcmulligan 5y ago
Indeed, imagine if instead of the western war train came, the western supply train came to all these countries. It would be a different world.

MisterBastahrd 5y ago

If they had invested them in index funds, the average person would have $109K sitting there for them today.