The simple answer is : A subsidy of such large proportions is not economically viable for the Govt.
A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
71–80 of 840 posts
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#72>> "But in the U.S., many liberals see it as naive and a distraction from more practical priorities, such as a $15 minimum wage and paid family leave." I can't see how they could believe this. First of all a minimum wage becomes unimportant as you should hypothetically have enough money to support the kind of lifestyle a minimum wage job would provide without working. Secondly, as it's no longer financially critical…
I'm so glad we imported this style of politics to Australia. It's lovely watching our government openly and boldly torch tens of billions of dollars on our Internet infrastructure and condemn our economic prospects for decades simply to spite the other political party, while the idiot masses cheer them on because the blue team is winning against the red team.
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is already the case - go try and pursue a career in academia and see how much money you make compared to a plumber.
Some intellectually satisfying jobs (academic, author, artist, ...) pay badly. But many others are well paid, and probably most of the best-paid jobs are (1) largely brainwork and (2) pretty interesting to do. Some not-very-intellectual jobs (plumbers are everyone's favourite example, which makes me suspect there aren't many others) pay pretty well. But most don't. Some jobs that usually pay pretty well: Software dev…
Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, automation mechanics, fishermen off the top of my head. Just from local personal experience in a place with low unemployment.
It's hard to disentangle the effects, since many of my age peers who went the blue-collar route weren't exactly responsible... but those who were, and some who weren't, still did very well for themselves. Theoretically, maybe we white-collar workers would do better after 20 years - but not if our blue-collar friends invested their savings in the meantime (which many do).
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#74From the $1 trillon stated in the article, spread across 300 million people, each person would get around $3000 a year. That honestly doesn't seem like it would help a lot, considering it would replace current welfare systems. The Swiss proposal of around $2600 a month, implemented in the US, would cost nearly $10 trillion a year which doesn't really seem feasible. I don't think the problem with basic income is an id…
I absolutely agree but my biggest fear is that socialists don't give a shit and will push "progressive taxes". I live in Scotland and they love the fact that they can raise taxes here now... they openly talk about it and very few people I know bat an eyelid! But it's the curse of socialism imo: As long as you tax people earning more than me then I am fine with it. Sadly, something I have heard too often Edit: Spellin…
There are some sorts of political proposal it's reasonable to be shocked at people talking openly about. For me, they're things like: Reintroducing slavery. Switching to communism. Putting people in prison for having the wrong religion. Expelling all black people from the country.
... Do I understand correctly that you consider raising taxes to be in this category?
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't read into it too much at the moment as it's still a bit of a pipe-dream just now although it's looking more likely to change but I sit on the fence at this time (with a lean towards "no"). I don't see that happening to be honest but I do see something worse... Won't the price of everything go up for those that don't currently need the welfare system? Is this a sort of stealth tax increase on the middle clas…
I think that is the point, there will be too many people "that can't work" due to tech innovations. It all makes sense if you think about welfare not as "these slouches are rewarded for the laziness" but as a price you pay so that unemployed people are not forced into violent property expropriation from you. When large swaths of population don't have an access to money-making jobs, it significantly affects middle cla…
The "get yours" mentality is flawed because all you end up doing is imprisoning large sections of the population for poverty-driven crime, and you end up paying for their imprisonment.
What do prisoners get while in prison? Basic necessities, like food, shelter, warmth.
A kind of basic income, if you will.
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#76From the $1 trillon stated in the article, spread across 300 million people, each person would get around $3000 a year. That honestly doesn't seem like it would help a lot, considering it would replace current welfare systems. The Swiss proposal of around $2600 a month, implemented in the US, would cost nearly $10 trillion a year which doesn't really seem feasible. I don't think the problem with basic income is an id…
The main problem with a general basic income is that it would be enormously wasteful, regressive and unfair. If you have a good economic situation, 250$/month is peanuts. If you are grasping for air, it won't be enough; even more so if it comes at the expense of getting rid of public programmes that can target concrete problems and leverage economies of scale.
Other approaches (e.g. minimum guaranteed income for the jobless and tax credits for the working poor) look like a far better use of resources.
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#77I will say that if the US ever got a basic income, I wouldn't have a reason to kill myself anymore.
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#78From the $1 trillon stated in the article, spread across 300 million people, each person would get around $3000 a year. That honestly doesn't seem like it would help a lot, considering it would replace current welfare systems. The Swiss proposal of around $2600 a month, implemented in the US, would cost nearly $10 trillion a year which doesn't really seem feasible. I don't think the problem with basic income is an id…
I absolutely agree but my biggest fear is that socialists don't give a shit and will push "progressive taxes". I live in Scotland and they love the fact that they can raise taxes here now... they openly talk about it and very few people I know bat an eyelid! But it's the curse of socialism imo: As long as you tax people earning more than me then I am fine with it. Sadly, something I have heard too often Edit: Spellin…
Very few people bat an eyelid because the upcoming election is a guaranteed SNP win, and they aren't planning on raising taxes - despite claiming to be a more progressive party.
If Scotland was really keen for tax rises the SNP would implement them given they are currently focusing on nothing but winning sufficient support for a second Independence Referendum.
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if that would actually be the case, but if it were, the question would be: is it actually a bad thing? I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste [1]. In fact, it is normal that as our society gets more educated and the supply of unskilled workers goes down, a lot of hard manual labor will become expensive. This is already the case with mining,…
I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste [1]. In general I agree. However, besides education costs (I have quite many friends who have a sizeable loan), software engineers also enter the workforce quite a bit later. E.g., taking Netherlands as an example: - Waste collector: age 12-16 VMBO - Software engineer: age 12-18 VWO, age 18-23 BA+MA university Also,…
In the brave new world of guaranteed income, why would you need a pension?
Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cost of inflation is spread across the whole economy. The brunt will mainly be borne by those holding large liquid cash reserves and owning loans, not minimum wagers.
I still think that until the real estate question is resolved it's all a moot point. Already-inflated property markets will just become more inflated.
Actually it will probably depress property markets. Our inflated property markets are caused by the ultrawealthy hoarding their wealth in property.
A large dose of cost-push inflation will drain that wealth, causing them to sell off their property, causing the price of it to drop.