6 ms·

This type of thing can generate freeloaders who deliberately choose not to work; something no economy wants. I understand and agree with the heart of the idea t

This type of thing can generate freeloaders who deliberately choose not to work; something no economy wants. I understand and agree with the heart of the idea though. A better alternative would be to offer the possibility of a guaranteed government job with a guaranteed minimum pay. This sort of thing was done on a massive scale in the united states during the great depression. See the PWA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Works_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Works_Administration

thedufer 11y ago
> This type of thing can generate freeloaders who deliberately choose not to work; something no economy wants. That's actually an explicit goal of many basic income proposals. The fear of high unemployment as we automate industries faster than workers can retrain is a driving force behind the growing popularity of BI.
stefantalpalaru 11y ago
The freeloaders exist already. In Italy two thirds of the population is maintained by the other third. A real problem would be if a significant portion of the workforce suddenly decides it doesn't want to work anymore. Maybe social status and cultural pressures will keep this under check. As long as freeloaders don't harm the economy, they're a small price to pay in the overall scheme of things. We won't know until we see it happening somewhere.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  Right. Sure. Guaranteed pay is good to help people during hard times, I totally get and agree with that and I agree with you. But please read the second paragraph of my original post. I suggest Guaranteed government WORK as a better alternative to Guaranteed PAY. Freeloading may be a small sacrifice that is the result of base income, BUT freeloading is virtually non existent if you change base income to guaranteed public work. The unemployed can be set to work on community projects that benefit the entire economy. The hoover dam was built using this technique during the great depression.
  - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
    I'm afraid most of those jobs made up by the government to increase the employment rate are useless jobs. And useless jobs are worse than freeloaders. BTW, that's what they did in communist Romania: everybody had a job, but most of the jobs where bullshit. There was even a saying: we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us. We don't need to dig holes and then fill them in order to survive. We need food, water, shelter, medical care and so on. The sooner we get past the mindset that any work, no matter how useless to the society, entitles us to have what we need, the sooner we stop wasting our resources.
    - crimsonalucard 11y ago
      Why are useless jobs worse then freeloaders? They are the same to me. In the worst case the jobs are useless, the best case, they are useful. In all cases it is better than or equal to just giving them money.
      - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
        Useless jobs waste human capital, natural resources and tend to be a net negative for the society by wasting everybody's time and money. See how bureaucratic structures appear when useless employees have to justify their existence and try to gain a social position by becoming road blocks. We'd really be better off without useless jobs. And the people doing them would have a chance to do something better with their time.
        crimsonalucard 11y ago
        Human capital is also wasted when no one is working. It's one and the same thing. You're just arguing for the fact that making people work ends up wasting more capital than just giving them money for free. AKA administrative overhead is what you're complaining about. You realize that distributing this money will also yield administrative overhead? As for natural resources, I believe centralized planning can often yield better allocation of natural resources then the free market. See the internet, national freeway system, and the hoover dam.
RayVR 11y ago
I'd rather have more freeloaders than more bureaucrats.
- chiaro 11y ago
  Or than more homeless people, drug addicts, single parents struggling to feed their families. But yeah, bureaucrats too.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  How does increasing freeloaders decrease bureaucrats? The two are mutually independent. Either way I'm on your side. Please read my comment again. I suggested a method similar to a guaranteed base salary which eliminates freeloaders: Guaranteed work. Think about it: If you can't find a job, you're down on your luck, the government can guarantee that you will have a job and have a wage during such times as part of some public works administration. The skills of the unemployed will be put to good use AND they will be helped. Please note the hoover dam was the result of such an endeavor.
  - zaccus 11y ago
    How is creating unnecessary jobs a better idea? Even with the public works projects of the New Deal era, there were still a lot more unskilled workers than there was work to be done. That didn't change until WWII, and we definitely don't need another one of those.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Right; its a new world. Today Hoover Dam would be built by large machinery plus very skilled operators. Not by a mob of folks hauling cement around. There will be less and less room in this brave new world for unskilled labor. Either accept that a lot of people will never work again, or as you suggest, another WWII.
stuaxo 11y ago
There are plenty of workers 'freeloading' too ... browsing this site, reddit ... it would be better if instead of doing bullshit jobs they were freed and could do something useful if they choose, and if not, thats fine too (after all they aren't at the moment either).

thedufer 11y ago

> This type of thing can generate freeloaders who deliberately choose not to work; something no economy wants. That's actually an explicit goal of many basic income proposals. The fear of high unemployment as we automate industries faster than workers can retrain is a driving force behind the growing popularity of BI.

stefantalpalaru 11y ago

The freeloaders exist already. In Italy two thirds of the population is maintained by the other third. A real problem would be if a significant portion of the workforce suddenly decides it doesn't want to work anymore. Maybe social status and cultural pressures will keep this under check. As long as freeloaders don't harm the economy, they're a small price to pay in the overall scheme of things. We won't know until we see it happening somewhere.

crimsonalucard 11y ago
Right. Sure. Guaranteed pay is good to help people during hard times, I totally get and agree with that and I agree with you. But please read the second paragraph of my original post. I suggest Guaranteed government WORK as a better alternative to Guaranteed PAY. Freeloading may be a small sacrifice that is the result of base income, BUT freeloading is virtually non existent if you change base income to guaranteed public work. The unemployed can be set to work on community projects that benefit the entire economy. The hoover dam was built using this technique during the great depression.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  I'm afraid most of those jobs made up by the government to increase the employment rate are useless jobs. And useless jobs are worse than freeloaders. BTW, that's what they did in communist Romania: everybody had a job, but most of the jobs where bullshit. There was even a saying: we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us. We don't need to dig holes and then fill them in order to survive. We need food, water, shelter, medical care and so on. The sooner we get past the mindset that any work, no matter how useless to the society, entitles us to have what we need, the sooner we stop wasting our resources.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    Why are useless jobs worse then freeloaders? They are the same to me. In the worst case the jobs are useless, the best case, they are useful. In all cases it is better than or equal to just giving them money.
    - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
      Useless jobs waste human capital, natural resources and tend to be a net negative for the society by wasting everybody's time and money. See how bureaucratic structures appear when useless employees have to justify their existence and try to gain a social position by becoming road blocks. We'd really be better off without useless jobs. And the people doing them would have a chance to do something better with their time.
      - crimsonalucard 11y ago
        Human capital is also wasted when no one is working. It's one and the same thing. You're just arguing for the fact that making people work ends up wasting more capital than just giving them money for free. AKA administrative overhead is what you're complaining about. You realize that distributing this money will also yield administrative overhead? As for natural resources, I believe centralized planning can often yield better allocation of natural resources then the free market. See the internet, national freeway system, and the hoover dam.

RayVR 11y ago

I'd rather have more freeloaders than more bureaucrats.

chiaro 11y ago
Or than more homeless people, drug addicts, single parents struggling to feed their families. But yeah, bureaucrats too.
crimsonalucard 11y ago
How does increasing freeloaders decrease bureaucrats? The two are mutually independent. Either way I'm on your side. Please read my comment again. I suggested a method similar to a guaranteed base salary which eliminates freeloaders: Guaranteed work. Think about it: If you can't find a job, you're down on your luck, the government can guarantee that you will have a job and have a wage during such times as part of some public works administration. The skills of the unemployed will be put to good use AND they will be helped. Please note the hoover dam was the result of such an endeavor.
- zaccus 11y ago
  How is creating unnecessary jobs a better idea? Even with the public works projects of the New Deal era, there were still a lot more unskilled workers than there was work to be done. That didn't change until WWII, and we definitely don't need another one of those.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Right; its a new world. Today Hoover Dam would be built by large machinery plus very skilled operators. Not by a mob of folks hauling cement around. There will be less and less room in this brave new world for unskilled labor. Either accept that a lot of people will never work again, or as you suggest, another WWII.

stuaxo 11y ago

There are plenty of workers 'freeloading' too ... browsing this site, reddit ... it would be better if instead of doing bullshit jobs they were freed and could do something useful if they choose, and if not, thats fine too (after all they aren't at the moment either).