3 ms·

I'm not looking at it from that point of view, people need to obviously get good jobs. Take away all those 'entry level jobs' and this will decrease GDP no? If

I'm not looking at it from that point of view, people need to obviously get good jobs. Take away all those 'entry level jobs' and this will decrease GDP no? If the GDP decreases this will decrease tax revenue? And will this not decrease resources available for next years BI? If they have less BI next year there's less spending & less GDP next year too.. and it continues spiralling down. This is far from the claim that BI will have no chance of decreasing GDP It's all well and good to make lives better, what about the long run? This would solve it for a year or two what then?

conanbatt 11y ago
People stopping to work does not necessarily mean GDP reduces. Precisely because they still have money to spend, GDP will almost surely go up. Maybe you are thinking of amount of hours worked, that would go down, but that does not mean productivity, or quality of work, or amount of services and goods. If only 10% stop doing minimum wages and go to school, and pursue a typical corporate carrier, and make 10 times minimum wage, the offset of the 90% not working minimum jobs anymore would be completely offset. Not to mention that people needing to get a job within 2 or 3 days pick terrible jobs with no future, so those that dont go to school will still be able to pick jobs better.
learc83 11y ago
There's no way to answer these questions through thought experiments, you have to look at the available data. There have been several direct basic income experiments, and many other situations that provide relevant data (Native American casino profit distributions for example). Obviously we need more experiments, but the data we have shows that unemployment tends to go down not up. >Take away all those 'entry level jobs' and this will decrease GDP no? Most of the entry level jobs your talking about are being automated away regardless of whether we have a basic income. But lets remove automation from the equation and assume no increased automation over the next few decades. You're ignoring the second order effects of a basic income. People who make less than $12,000 a year will definitely make more money, and people who make less than $50,000 or so (whatever the break even point is) who keep working the same amount will also make more money. People in lower income brackets tend to spend their money directly on consumption--this will directly increase GDP. The data shows that the increase in GDP due to increased spending among the lower income people who make more money each month will likely offset any decreased spending from people who are making less money each month as a result of a basic income plan (either as a result of working less, or paying higher taxes).

conanbatt 11y ago

People stopping to work does not necessarily mean GDP reduces. Precisely because they still have money to spend, GDP will almost surely go up. Maybe you are thinking of amount of hours worked, that would go down, but that does not mean productivity, or quality of work, or amount of services and goods. If only 10% stop doing minimum wages and go to school, and pursue a typical corporate carrier, and make 10 times minimum wage, the offset of the 90% not working minimum jobs anymore would be completely offset. Not to mention that people needing to get a job within 2 or 3 days pick terrible jobs with no future, so those that dont go to school will still be able to pick jobs better.

learc83 11y ago

There's no way to answer these questions through thought experiments, you have to look at the available data. There have been several direct basic income experiments, and many other situations that provide relevant data (Native American casino profit distributions for example). Obviously we need more experiments, but the data we have shows that unemployment tends to go down not up. >Take away all those 'entry level jobs' and this will decrease GDP no? Most of the entry level jobs your talking about are being automated away regardless of whether we have a basic income. But lets remove automation from the equation and assume no increased automation over the next few decades. You're ignoring the second order effects of a basic income. People who make less than $12,000 a year will definitely make more money, and people who make less than $50,000 or so (whatever the break even point is) who keep working the same amount will also make more money. People in lower income brackets tend to spend their money directly on consumption--this will directly increase GDP. The data shows that the increase in GDP due to increased spending among the lower income people who make more money each month will likely offset any decreased spending from people who are making less money each month as a result of a basic income plan (either as a result of working less, or paying higher taxes).