9 ms·

It looks like this is not a "saturation" site for testing the basic income theory. All participants appear to start with the same income, but the basic income

It looks like this is not a "saturation" site for testing the basic income theory. All participants appear to start with the same income, but the basic income group receives their income with no strings attached. This can create some unfortunate incentives that would not occur had everyone received a basic income. For example, if you have one group with a basic income and one group without a basic income in the same population, the group without would be more likely to be hired for low wage jobs because that salary is much more important to them. If everyone had a basic income, then all potential hires would be on an equal footing and it would not look like the non-basic income group is more employable. One way to test the basic income theory is to give everyone a very low basic income and then slowly increase that amount over time. If basic income works, it should be beneficial even at low rates that do not massively disrupt the tax and welfare system. When this is seen to have beneficial effects (or at least not adverse effects), the rates can be increased.

squids 11y ago
>the group without would be more likely to be hired for low wage jobs because that salary is much more important to them. That's not necessarily how it would work. In the UK we've had a top up with tax credits for low paid jobs. What we've seen is an explosion of low paid part time jobs as businesses know people will take them as their income will be topped up by the govt.
- johnchristopher 11y ago
  That's irritating to read because when basic income is being discussed it's always about people taking advantage of it for not working when in the real world it's more likely the bosses and the people in power who will take advantage of it (and they will, a relative of mine lost his job at 50 because a govt sponsored win-win program targeting the youth: hire a young gun and the govt will pay a part of his salary. Now they had to pay my relative a hefy sum of money in social benefits. He luckily found a better job later and his old company is now playing carousel with young guns and getting less done of course.)
  - Shivetya 11y ago
    well those who take advantage of it from the top down tend to be those who already are willing to work and employ others. As in, those who don't want work are not likely to see it. So I would not worry about it when the bosses and people in power step in unless they are laying off those already employed to do so. That is the area where abuse would be bad and must be prevented

squids 11y ago

>the group without would be more likely to be hired for low wage jobs because that salary is much more important to them. That's not necessarily how it would work. In the UK we've had a top up with tax credits for low paid jobs. What we've seen is an explosion of low paid part time jobs as businesses know people will take them as their income will be topped up by the govt.

johnchristopher 11y ago
That's irritating to read because when basic income is being discussed it's always about people taking advantage of it for not working when in the real world it's more likely the bosses and the people in power who will take advantage of it (and they will, a relative of mine lost his job at 50 because a govt sponsored win-win program targeting the youth: hire a young gun and the govt will pay a part of his salary. Now they had to pay my relative a hefy sum of money in social benefits. He luckily found a better job later and his old company is now playing carousel with young guns and getting less done of course.)
- Shivetya 11y ago
  well those who take advantage of it from the top down tend to be those who already are willing to work and employ others. As in, those who don't want work are not likely to see it. So I would not worry about it when the bosses and people in power step in unless they are laying off those already employed to do so. That is the area where abuse would be bad and must be prevented