The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
motherboard.vice.com
The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
1–10 of 99 posts
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#2Hope we start experimenting with this in the US also. Maybe at a state level.
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#3Where true basic income differs from this experiment by Canada is that true basic income should be for every adult, regardless of income, race, marital status, sexuality, etc. Not just for poor people, as with Mincome in this Canadian town.
A few arguments for:
1) It becomes a defacto emergency lifeline when a ostensibly middle class person loses their job or suffers an extremely expensive illness. In the US, it can take forever to get on disability. With true basic income, there's no need to worry about getting on disability, since you already have a basic income (and yes, this means that disability should be eliminated if this passes).
2) It becomes much less expensive to administer. No massive bureaucracy started up and growing larger just to weed out candidates for some shitty benefit. You're an adult person? Great, you're in!
3) When everyone gets it, it's much more politically feasible to start and maintain. No more questions of "them" doing this or "they" ripping off the hard working man.
4) It allows even healthy middle class people to take risks that might have a big payoff, such as starting up a new business, or embarking on a quest to invent some new technique. Or build an open source project!
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#4Hope we start experimenting with this in the US also. Maybe at a state level.
There's the Permanent Fund Dividend in Alaska, though it only hit $3269 its peak year, and that was with a bump from a budget surplus.
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#5Where true basic income differs from this experiment by Canada is that true basic income should be for every adult, regardless of income, race, marital status, sexuality, etc. Not just for poor people, as with Mincome in this Canadian town. A few arguments for: 1) It becomes a defacto emergency lifeline when a ostensibly middle class person loses their job or suffers an extremely expensive illness. In the US, it can…
I like this idea a lot, but what would stop goods/housing from rising in price to meet the influx of free money?
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#6Where true basic income differs from this experiment by Canada is that true basic income should be for every adult, regardless of income, race, marital status, sexuality, etc. Not just for poor people, as with Mincome in this Canadian town. A few arguments for: 1) It becomes a defacto emergency lifeline when a ostensibly middle class person loses their job or suffers an extremely expensive illness. In the US, it can…
I like this idea a lot, but what would stop goods/housing from rising in price to meet the influx of free money?
That was my initial response when I first heard this concept a few years ago, and the answer is somewhat surprising (Note: I'm not an economist, so please someone correct me if I get anything wrong here):
3 things can alter those prices: A change in supply, a change in demand, or general inflation/deflation.
The supply doesn't inherently change in this plan, nor does demand (*assuming everyone is getting these goods today.) And there's no inflation, as this is just redistribution, not printing new money.
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#7Hope we start experimenting with this in the US also. Maybe at a state level.
It would have to be in an extremely liberal area. Socialism is still a four letter word in the US, and this is the epitome of socialist initiatives.
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like this idea a lot, but what would stop goods/housing from rising in price to meet the influx of free money?
That was my initial response when I first heard this concept a few years ago, and the answer is somewhat surprising (Note: I'm not an economist, so please someone correct me if I get anything wrong here): 3 things can alter those prices: A change in supply, a change in demand, or general inflation/deflation. The supply doesn't inherently change in this plan, nor does demand (*assuming everyone is getting these goods…
Doesn't demand go up, as more people can afford a given house?
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like this idea a lot, but what would stop goods/housing from rising in price to meet the influx of free money?
That was my initial response when I first heard this concept a few years ago, and the answer is somewhat surprising (Note: I'm not an economist, so please someone correct me if I get anything wrong here): 3 things can alter those prices: A change in supply, a change in demand, or general inflation/deflation. The supply doesn't inherently change in this plan, nor does demand (*assuming everyone is getting these goods…
You're right in general, but there are second order effects. The poor are more likely to spend all of their income than the rich. Also, even if there isn't a general increase in prices (i.e. inflation) there can still be a change in the relative prices. So for example, luxury housing might come down slightly in price as a consequence of the increased taxes, but entry level housing might come up to reflect new household formation enabled by the universal stipend.
Re: The Mincome Experiment of 1974-79
#10Where true basic income differs from this experiment by Canada is that true basic income should be for every adult, regardless of income, race, marital status, sexuality, etc. Not just for poor people, as with Mincome in this Canadian town. A few arguments for: 1) It becomes a defacto emergency lifeline when a ostensibly middle class person loses their job or suffers an extremely expensive illness. In the US, it can…
I like this idea a lot, but what would stop goods/housing from rising in price to meet the influx of free money?
Taxes have to go up to pay for this so there isn't actually more money supply than there was before, it's just distributed differently.