4 ms·
Ideally, increases would get tied to the CPI, or some other index. I also wouldn't mind a provision that would automatically adjust payments to ensure solvency
by pyoung 13y ago
Ideally, increases would get tied to the CPI, or some other index. I also wouldn't mind a provision that would automatically adjust payments to ensure solvency.
Regarding the amount, it should be small enough to make it difficult to live off of. I don't think it would be a good idea if we created a class of BI dependents. There should still be fairly strong incentives to work. I think the main purpose of the BI would be to alleviate the need to rely on corporate america as a de facto social welfare provider. If you look at what happened to Detroit, for example, after the car industry tanked, the local economy went down with it. At the very least, BI would have provided a stabilizing force, slowing down the decline, and possibly giving residents a chance to re-build the local economy.
- kyllo 13y agoI think the main purpose of the BI would be to alleviate the need to rely on corporate america as a de facto social welfare provider. Exactly. In America we still have social welfare benefits, we just get them mostly from our employers rather than from our government, because at some point, for some reason, we decided that we don't want the government to provide them. The implicit assumption being that people without jobs don't deserve them. Social welfare benefits really should be in the scope of the government's responsibility, not private corporations'. They shouldn't be tied to a particular place of employment, especially as job positions get scarcer and shorter.