$12k per year x 320M people = $3.84 trillion, which is 22.9% of annual GDP. That's a pretty steep price tag for a thousand dollars a month.
[deleted]
Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
11–20 of 212 posts
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#12$12k per year x 320M people = $3.84 trillion, which is 22.9% of annual GDP. That's a pretty steep price tag for a thousand dollars a month.
[deleted]
I see all the arguments for it, but I always find this to be the argument against it which I believe would be the issue myself.
If one had basic income why would they need to work? The incentives favour against the need to work. That income could be saved up and used in countries where the PPP value is much higher. Or just live and not work (which would decrease tax revenues forth).
If people started to work less the basic income scheme would not have a source from tax and it spirals down GDP.
I keep bringing this up, but no one here likes to give a decent explanation as to why this will not be the case.
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#13$12k per year x 320M people = $3.84 trillion, which is 22.9% of annual GDP. That's a pretty steep price tag for a thousand dollars a month.
First of all, you're only going to pay the adults. That eliminates about a quarter of the population. Second of all, you're still going to collect taxes, so many people will just have the income taxed back. Say, only people below median income end up keeping the money. This cuts the figure down to 1.44 trillion. This is still a lot (we currently spend about $850 billion on social security, which would presumably be replaced by basic income), but it's not unmanageable.
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#14Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#15$12k per year x 320M people = $3.84 trillion, which is 22.9% of annual GDP. That's a pretty steep price tag for a thousand dollars a month.
[deleted]
If you'd actually bothered to read the article you'd see that in the pilot project productivity went up.
Unemployment dropped as well, from 60% to 45%, and there was a 29% increase in average earned income, excluding the basic income grant.
Also from the wiki link posted by OP:
As published in a recent report, "All those dollars low-wage workers spend create an economic ripple effec. Every extra dollar going into the pockets of low-wage workers, standard economic multiplier models tell us, adds about $1.21 to the national economy. Every extra dollar going into the pockets of a high-income American, by contrast, only adds about 39 cents to the GDP."
There could be statistics that support the argument that you are making as well but I don't think that:
> "I'd have to imagine..."
without any references to support your statement contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#16One of the better article on subject. It's affordable, though it implies new huge tax. Like tax on land.
Though not sure if people would support that, once they saw the bill for their land. Changing status quo is hard.
Though I would suggest that universal free healthcare is some form of basic income. Maybe let's do it first?
Another less hardcore version is to expand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit
E.g. Tax rate is negative on initial amount. E.g. You earn $2k and get additional $200 tax refund.
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
If you'd actually bothered to read the article you'd see that in the pilot project productivity went up. Unemployment dropped as well, from 60% to 45%, and there was a 29% increase in average earned income, excluding the basic income grant. Also from the wiki link posted by OP: As published in a recent report, "All those dollars low-wage workers spend create an economic ripple effec. Every extra dollar going into the…
[deleted]
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I see all the arguments for it, but I always find this to be the argument against it which I believe would be the issue myself. If one had basic income why would they need to work? The incentives favour against the need to work. That income could be saved up and used in countries where the PPP value is much higher. Or just live and not work (which would decrease tax revenues forth). If people started to work less the…
Why do people work at non entry-level jobs now?
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I see all the arguments for it, but I always find this to be the argument against it which I believe would be the issue myself. If one had basic income why would they need to work? The incentives favour against the need to work. That income could be saved up and used in countries where the PPP value is much higher. Or just live and not work (which would decrease tax revenues forth). If people started to work less the…
THe incentives work against crappy jobs and low paid work, otherwise working is extra money: that's a pretty big incentive. EVeryone that makes more than 1k dollars a month now would keep working to not see their income substantially diminish. Those that get abuse from work, and minimum wage might consider doing something else. Which is a step forward.
Re: Why Should We Support the Idea of an Unconditional Basic Income?
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see all the arguments for it, but I always find this to be the argument against it which I believe would be the issue myself. If one had basic income why would they need to work? The incentives favour against the need to work. That income could be saved up and used in countries where the PPP value is much higher. Or just live and not work (which would decrease tax revenues forth). If people started to work less the…
Why do people work at non entry-level jobs now?
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?