Moving Forward on Basic Income

The concept of universal basic income typically removes that qualifier - everyone, regardless of income, qualifies for it.

I'm going to assume that this means "provided for approximately $2k/year". In any case, the value of that number isn't an argument against UBI, but rather, the amount UBI should be set at. Maybe the right value is $2k/person/year.

> Basic needs? Everyone in America has their basic needs.

Given that there are adults in the U.S.A. who earn less than $2k/year, there must be people who are either not getting their basic needs met, or are getting them met only through welfare programs.

> A tent, a pair or two of clothing, and meals of rice/beans/vegetables

Assuming this was the minimum, you also need a plot of land in which you can legally stake your tent - a pretty big problem for homeless today. The rent on this land also factors in to the necessary price per person per year.

In my personal opinion, I'd say the full set of human needs includes food, shelter, hygiene, health care, companionship, and the opportunity for self-improvement/advancement. Food and shelter you've covered, companionship can be free, and hygiene doesn't have to cost much of anything.

In our current society, an opportunity for self-improvement depends on education, reasonable transportation to economically viable areas, and communication technology (such as phone or internet).

None of these things are necessarily extremely expensive, at the bare-bones, no-luxuries level. The overall cost might be a little more than $2k/person/year, it isn't necessarily as high as $10k/person/year.

In any case, I expect that providing someone who doesn't have these things (food, shelter, hygiene, and opportunity for self-improvement) will cause an non-zero-sum increase in happiness, and right now, there are people who don't have all of these things.

It seems to me that the general idea is that current welfare systems, at least in the US, are piecemeal at best. There are many, many people who slip through the cracks because they don't know help is available or are unable to navigate the various bureaucracies well enough to get the help they need. Many others refuse to even ask for help because they don't want to admit how poor their position is or they want to avoid the humiliation of asking for help and being turned down. Basic income eliminates that problem because it is applied equally to everyone. On top of that, it will create enormous social pressure for people to spend their money wisely.

I think the concern about people blowing their money is valid, and it will happen, as it has with our current system. There will always be a few people trying to get over. That being said, I think that our current system does a lot to create these people. Try genuinely asking for help, only to be told that you are an idiot, an incompetent, and a freeloader. It's not hard to see how that sort of humiliation can breed resentment, which can lead to people misusing their welfare benefits out of spite or hopelessness.

That being said, I strongly feel that BI can do a lot to minimize welfare abuse. For most working people it won't be too much of a stretch to build up an emergency fund, and, for many, the extra money would mean the difference between living paycheck to paycheck and being able to actually build a savings. Also, for many working people (i.e. walmart employees), 10k is the difference between self sufficiency and living on food stamps, with all the arcane requirements that entails. By filtering out these good people (for lack of a better term) it will be much easier to assess whether the people asking for further assistance are in genuine need, mentally ill, drug abusers, physically disabled, or just fiscally irresponsible. From there, it will be much easier to provide these people with more comprehensive assistance based on their needs, be it personal finance classes, assisted living, drug treatment, housing placement, etc.

From there, the idea is that we can streamline the current welfare system by eliminating more general programs in favor of more direct and targeted assistance. Obviously that's not going to be all that easy to do, given the quagmire that is our current welfare system, but I don't think it's an insurmountable problem.

Plus, people wouldn't need to save for retirement if they didn't want to. They could spend more which would provide a stimulus to economic activity. That's another benefit of BI.