Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We already have a class of wealthy trust fund kids who get all their needs met without needing to work and they have more money than the average working person, to boot. I think it makes more sense that everyone receive a small stipend, rather than a small fraction receive immense wealth.
Also, while you're doomsaying about the impact of UBI on the population, we can observe that Alaska already has universal income and it has cut poverty by roughly 20%.
We already have a class of wealthy trust fund kids who get all their needs met without needing to work and they have more money than the average working person, to boot. I think it makes more sense that everyone receive a small stipend, rather than a small fraction receive immense wealth.
Also, while you're doomsaying about the impact of UBI on the population, we can observe that Alaska already has universal income and it has cut poverty by roughly 20%.
You might try being more accurate when using studies as storytelling back up.
1. The authors very clearly note the 20% number is their estimate as to how much Alaska's sovereign wealth fund payments may have lessened poverty over time.
2. Their own numbers (figure 3) show Anchorage, x-Anchorage urban and rural poverty metrics are worse to significantly worse since 1990 not better.
1. The authors very clearly note the 20% number is their estimate as to how much Alaska's sovereign wealth fund payments may have lessened poverty over time.
No. You implied that the 20% number as a fact. Instead it's a guess. Further, you omitted completely that Alaska's poverty grew worse over the ~30 year span covered.
Only lazy, unambitious and retarded (I don't mean disable or handicapped) people want UBI. All they want is to just sit there and have little income (enough for their monthly food, clothes and rent) to come in every month.
There will be some lazy people who will be happy to collect UBI, rent a room and play video games all day. Most people will grow tired of that and will want to be productive. There are those who are stuck in low-paying full time jobs who will be able to go to school, learn a trade, or start a small business. For many people UBI will mean freedom, freedom to improve themselves. With UBI they will no longer be chained down to 40 hr/week dead end jobs.
It didn't in the 1990's when the Bush-Clinton tax increases were followed by a tight-fisted Congress, resulting in a budget surplus. And here in California tax increases also resulted in budget surpluses, a tax rebate and revenue stuffed into a rainy day fund. A corollary to that is that cutting taxes does not mean reduced spending -- we saw that with Trump's budgets, even prior to the pandemic.
That's true. Since then, however, national debt has increased from $4T to $30T, and from 60% of GDP to 120%. No president has taken any steps to slow the growth. I hesitate to guess what levels federal income tax would have to reach to have any hope of creating surpluses that would be used to actually reduce the debt and not simply spent.
If there's UBI, the people who work hard will have to pay more and more tax; otherwise, where can the government have money to give the ones who don't work? The hard working people will be mad; and millions of them may become lazy because who would want to work hard and pay lots of tax for the lazy ones? Then they will have not much left either.
They can just create the money from nothing. That is whole point of MMT isnt it? It really just about the rate at which its given out. Give too much too fast, people become too decadent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA
There will be some lazy people who will be happy to collect UBI, rent a room and play video games all day. Most people will grow tired of that and will want to be productive. There are those who are stuck in low-paying full time jobs who will be able to go to school, learn a trade, or start a small business. For many people UBI will mean freedom, freedom to improve themselves. With UBI they will no longer be chained down to 40 hr/week dead end jobs.
And if UBI is high enough to make investments/speculations, and buy up assets, then recipients not ever have to work. They just, as you stated, live off rent, passive income, and monopoly IP.
There will be some lazy people who will be happy to collect UBI, rent a room and play video games all day. Most people will grow tired of that and will want to be productive. There are those who are stuck in low-paying full time jobs who will be able to go to school, learn a trade, or start a small business. For many people UBI will mean freedom, freedom to improve themselves. With UBI they will no longer be chained down to 40 hr/week dead end jobs.
That is not human nature - for most they will be fine just doing nothing - look at how many welfare queens there are and even more before welfare reform. We have already seen what happens - the majority are ok with never working and the few that do choose petty criminal or drug dealer as their profession so they don't have to give up their benefits.
We currently have Free or highly subsidized housing (section 8, etc), free food (SNAP), free clothing, utilities etc (TANF) but with little incentive to get better - few move off these programs - why would "most...want to be productive" where is the data on that.
Finland gave a UBI payment to a group of 2000 that was unemployed (instead of unemployment payment), with the understanding that they would keep the benefit if they got a job. The results were that people were happier because income was coming in but very few got a job. Significantly fewer than those on regular unemployment where there is incentive to get a job.
All you will do is create a permanent subsidized class.
They can just create the money from nothing. That is whole point of MMT isnt it? It really just about the rate at which its given out. Give too much too fast, people become too decadent.
And if UBI is high enough to make investments/speculations, and buy up assets, then recipients not ever have to work. They just, as you stated, live off rent, passive income, and monopoly IP.
MMT has no real backing in economics - it is wish of those that don't know any better that it is true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
