2 ms·

Ah! A Link! Well after some review of the information on that Wikipedia article it is clear that all income pilot programs have only been administered to a mino

Ah! A Link! Well after some review of the information on that Wikipedia article it is clear that all income pilot programs have only been administered to a minor degree in third world countries. The ideas of administering this system on a LARGE SCALE in a 'well-developed' country such as the US would probably bring many of the problems Friedrich Hayek theorizes it would. From Wikipedia: "It is obvious that for a long time to come it will be wholly impossible to secure an adequate and uniform minimum standard for all human beings everywhere, or at least that the wealthier countries would not be content to secure for their citizens no higher standards than can be secured for all men. But to confine to the citizens of particular countries provisions for a minimum standard higher than that universally applied makes it a privilege and necessitates certain limitations on the free movement of men across frontiers... we must face the fact that we here encounter a limit to the universal application of those liberal principles of policy which the existing facts of the present world make unavoidable." In other words people would flock from all over the world in DROVES to secure a spot in the unconditional free money system.

wutbrodo 13y ago
As with most economic policies, the degree to which it is implemented correctly is not linearly related to the quality of its outcomes: often one hole in correct implementation can torpedo the entire thing. In this case, providing a basic income is incompatible with open-borders immigration policy (i.e., limiting immigration to those who are likely to create more wealth than the cost of a basic income). On top of that, this is almost irrelevant to the discussion of basic income. This is not a problem with basic income, but simply "differences in expected income across countries". The higher expected income that the US produces ALREADY has the effect of drawing immigrants from poorer countries here, and we already have a system in place to prevent this from happening (too) en masse. This has been happening for over a century. I don't see why providing a basic income would appreciably increase this effect, or why the "flocking in droves" issue would suddenly become insurmountable when we've already been dealing with the same issue (without ruining the economy) for decades. Note that I'm discussing economic soundness here. It's totally possible that the vagaries of the American political system may prevent a key part of any economic concept from being implemented correctly, in which case all bets are off, of course.

wutbrodo 13y ago

As with most economic policies, the degree to which it is implemented correctly is not linearly related to the quality of its outcomes: often one hole in correct implementation can torpedo the entire thing. In this case, providing a basic income is incompatible with open-borders immigration policy (i.e., limiting immigration to those who are likely to create more wealth than the cost of a basic income). On top of that, this is almost irrelevant to the discussion of basic income. This is not a problem with basic income, but simply "differences in expected income across countries". The higher expected income that the US produces ALREADY has the effect of drawing immigrants from poorer countries here, and we already have a system in place to prevent this from happening (too) en masse. This has been happening for over a century. I don't see why providing a basic income would appreciably increase this effect, or why the "flocking in droves" issue would suddenly become insurmountable when we've already been dealing with the same issue (without ruining the economy) for decades. Note that I'm discussing economic soundness here. It's totally possible that the vagaries of the American political system may prevent a key part of any economic concept from being implemented correctly, in which case all bets are off, of course.