5 ms·

Chicago creates one of the nation’s largest ‘guaranteed basic income’ programs

29 points by mesofile 5y ago

bookofjoe 5y ago
https://archive.ph/XhSom https://archive.ph/XhSom
Proven 5y ago
Oh that UBI junk again.. Keep it coming! Everybody knows it can't work, but we need a good laugh every now and then!
ilaksh 5y ago
I guess the ship has sailed, but it's too bad these limited programs have taken over the term 'basic-income', which was supposed to refer to an unconditional grant for everyone based on cost of living. It's a similar sentiment, but really not the same thing when you give a few thousand people $500 versus giving a million people $2500 or $3000 or pick your much higher than $500 number. Because no one can live on $500 in the US and there are a lot more than a few thousand families suffering. I feel like the only really humane thing to do is to have a livable wage as a floor. But also it seems like we will need a new type of high-tech money to make that work.
snarf21 5y ago
I frankly really hate how these buzzwords get through around. It isn't guaranteed and it isn't a program. We'll all go farther if we just be honest about what it is. You can't get any real learnings when you know it is going to stop in a year. To be clear, I completely support this kind of pilot. It is essentially needs-based free $500/month for 5000 families. They need the help, so give them the money. But the only way we are going to afford a UBI-like program is to remove all the bureaucracy currently wasted to administer these programs. All so that someone doesn't accidentally get an extra $100 or is eligible despite making $1K/year more than some nonsense restriction. Instead, take those billions (across the US) and start helping people instead of paying people to make sure those who need it don't get help. We can just use previous year's taxes to figure out thresholds if it isn't truly universal with minimal overhead.
- ChrisLomont 5y ago
  >But the only way we are going to afford a UBI-like program is to remove all the bureaucracy currently wasted to administer these programs. The overhead compared to money given to people in such programs is minimal.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    UBI style "got a pulse get a check" programs sure. Current means tested programs are full of waste.
    - ChrisLomont 5y ago
      The biggest means tested program, SSA, has less than 1% overhead [1]. Care to cite one with waste by providing the budget numbers? Care to show any of the UBI "experiments" had less overhead than this? I cannot find any, and I checked a few. In fact, here [2] is a peer reviewed article demonstrating that the efficiency UBI proponents imagine is a myth in practice. [1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html [2] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.835.2632&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.83...
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    Citation?
    - ChrisLomont 5y ago
      It's easy to check - pick the biggest program, Social Security. Look at Social Security outlay, say for 2019 (pick any year) [1] and you get $1,091,345M, number of people getting benefits (71,322,000), and operating budget (13,083M). This means expenses to provide 1.091 trillion in assistance is 0.013 trillion, so the overhead is around 1%. In fact, they do all this for you, finding administration costs well under 1% [2] when all benefits and costs are accounted for. Pick any program you want, do the same. Medicare, SNAP, TANF, SNAP... go ahead and show me the excessive overhead to manage these programs. Have a citation to the contrary? [1] https://www.ssa.gov/budget/ https://www.ssa.gov/budget/ [2] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
steve76 5y ago
USA leadership is in desperate need for clarity. Why riots don't work. Why fools from far away do not get to tell everyone what to do just for the luxury of having them around. Why you don't rush to your own execution or steal from your family for the very poison that kills you. Why you don't betray your neighbors, and how jihadis and marxists and the cartel cheer when Americans die. Hands off free markets. Leave people alone. Don't meddle. You only make things worse and that's rule zero for authority. Leadership is not celebrity. People are poor for a reason. If you want that stuff, you build the bridge. You hire people. See for yourself what the problems are. Things like real malice and treason. Things like building something big often results in people dying. I would think the atomic bomb would be enough. Guess not. I wonder what they are going to make me do next, what grotesque act ends this cursed scavenger hunt. Modern medicine can cut out someone's brain. Launch it into space. Send it adrift. Close it off with particle beams and solar instruments and black hole data so they will never reach it again and it will live forever in horrible agony. ... ... yeah ... that ought to hold those SOBs.
_peeley 5y ago
If I had a nickel for every "guaranteed basic income" program I saw headlines about that is needs-based yet insufficient for even the most basic needs, I'd have enough money to institute a real UBI.
thoughtstheseus 5y ago
Everyone is much too focused on UBI. We need the payment rails in place first. Master accounts at the Fed gets us to a DCBC and the option of UBI.
- landemva 5y ago
  The rails exist as SNAP EBT, which is already used for food and cash. No need to further empower the private central bank.
  - thoughtstheseus 5y ago
    Using SNAP rails sounds ineffective. SNAP is collection of state run programs. No thanks. My proposal reallocates “power” away from commercial banks to a broader swath of people and providers.

29 points by mesofile 5y ago

bookofjoe 5y ago

https://archive.ph/XhSom https://archive.ph/XhSom

Proven 5y ago

Oh that UBI junk again.. Keep it coming! Everybody knows it can't work, but we need a good laugh every now and then!

ilaksh 5y ago

I guess the ship has sailed, but it's too bad these limited programs have taken over the term 'basic-income', which was supposed to refer to an unconditional grant for everyone based on cost of living. It's a similar sentiment, but really not the same thing when you give a few thousand people $500 versus giving a million people $2500 or $3000 or pick your much higher than $500 number. Because no one can live on $500 in the US and there are a lot more than a few thousand families suffering. I feel like the only really humane thing to do is to have a livable wage as a floor. But also it seems like we will need a new type of high-tech money to make that work.

snarf21 5y ago

I frankly really hate how these buzzwords get through around. It isn't guaranteed and it isn't a program. We'll all go farther if we just be honest about what it is. You can't get any real learnings when you know it is going to stop in a year. To be clear, I completely support this kind of pilot. It is essentially needs-based free $500/month for 5000 families. They need the help, so give them the money. But the only way we are going to afford a UBI-like program is to remove all the bureaucracy currently wasted to administer these programs. All so that someone doesn't accidentally get an extra $100 or is eligible despite making $1K/year more than some nonsense restriction. Instead, take those billions (across the US) and start helping people instead of paying people to make sure those who need it don't get help. We can just use previous year's taxes to figure out thresholds if it isn't truly universal with minimal overhead.

ChrisLomont 5y ago
>But the only way we are going to afford a UBI-like program is to remove all the bureaucracy currently wasted to administer these programs. The overhead compared to money given to people in such programs is minimal.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  UBI style "got a pulse get a check" programs sure. Current means tested programs are full of waste.
  - ChrisLomont 5y ago
    The biggest means tested program, SSA, has less than 1% overhead [1]. Care to cite one with waste by providing the budget numbers? Care to show any of the UBI "experiments" had less overhead than this? I cannot find any, and I checked a few. In fact, here [2] is a peer reviewed article demonstrating that the efficiency UBI proponents imagine is a myth in practice. [1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html [2] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.835.2632&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.83...
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Citation?
  - ChrisLomont 5y ago
    It's easy to check - pick the biggest program, Social Security. Look at Social Security outlay, say for 2019 (pick any year) [1] and you get $1,091,345M, number of people getting benefits (71,322,000), and operating budget (13,083M). This means expenses to provide 1.091 trillion in assistance is 0.013 trillion, so the overhead is around 1%. In fact, they do all this for you, finding administration costs well under 1% [2] when all benefits and costs are accounted for. Pick any program you want, do the same. Medicare, SNAP, TANF, SNAP... go ahead and show me the excessive overhead to manage these programs. Have a citation to the contrary? [1] https://www.ssa.gov/budget/ https://www.ssa.gov/budget/ [2] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

steve76 5y ago

USA leadership is in desperate need for clarity. Why riots don't work. Why fools from far away do not get to tell everyone what to do just for the luxury of having them around. Why you don't rush to your own execution or steal from your family for the very poison that kills you. Why you don't betray your neighbors, and how jihadis and marxists and the cartel cheer when Americans die. Hands off free markets. Leave people alone. Don't meddle. You only make things worse and that's rule zero for authority. Leadership is not celebrity. People are poor for a reason. If you want that stuff, you build the bridge. You hire people. See for yourself what the problems are. Things like real malice and treason. Things like building something big often results in people dying. I would think the atomic bomb would be enough. Guess not. I wonder what they are going to make me do next, what grotesque act ends this cursed scavenger hunt. Modern medicine can cut out someone's brain. Launch it into space. Send it adrift. Close it off with particle beams and solar instruments and black hole data so they will never reach it again and it will live forever in horrible agony. ... ... yeah ... that ought to hold those SOBs.

_peeley 5y ago

If I had a nickel for every "guaranteed basic income" program I saw headlines about that is needs-based yet insufficient for even the most basic needs, I'd have enough money to institute a real UBI.

thoughtstheseus 5y ago

Everyone is much too focused on UBI. We need the payment rails in place first. Master accounts at the Fed gets us to a DCBC and the option of UBI.

landemva 5y ago
The rails exist as SNAP EBT, which is already used for food and cash. No need to further empower the private central bank.
- thoughtstheseus 5y ago
  Using SNAP rails sounds ineffective. SNAP is collection of state run programs. No thanks. My proposal reallocates “power” away from commercial banks to a broader swath of people and providers.