Pro's and con's of a Universal Basic Income?

[MayhemMonkey]

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...versal-basic-income-public-services?CMP=fb_gu

We should all be able to agree: no one should be poor in a nation as wealthy as the US. Yet nearly 15% of Americans live below the poverty line. Perhaps one of the best solutions is also one of the oldest and simplest ideas: everyone should be guaranteed a small income, free from conditions.

Called a universal basic income by supporters, the idea has has attracted support throughout American history, from Thomas Paine to Martin Luther King Jr. But it has also faced unending criticism for one particular reason: the advocates of “austerity” say we simply can’t afford it – or any other dramatic spending on social security.

That argument dissolved this week with the release of the Panama Papers, which reveal the elaborate methods used by the wealthy to avoid paying back the societies that helped them to gain their wealth in the first place.

Roads and transportation infrastructure. Educated workforces. Courts and legal systems. Innovations sparked by government funding, such as the internet. No one – no matter how smart or hard working – joins the American or global elite without making use of these shared resources.

thought this was a good article and it raises some good points imo. Was just wondering what everyones opinions of this are and what the good points and bad points would be?

the best quote from the article was this though

A universal basic income would go a long way towards ensuring all Americans can have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as promised way back in 1776. Some may disagree with the notion of an unconditional cash grant, or object to it going to everyone. Just don’t say we can’t afford it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I think it might be necessary in the distant future should we develop true AI and advance automation enough. What if we find ourselves in a world where even doctors and engineers and computer scientists are obsolete because of automation/AI? A world where a select few who already had money or became wealthy through automation, the Bill Gates of AI for instance, have any wealth and the rest of us can't even get work collecting trash, flipping burgers, or even as scientists? I think that redistributing the vast wealth generated by society would be the best course of action to prevent mass poverty.

This is assuming the AI don't go all Skynet on us. If that happens we'll be even further from a universal basic income then we are now.

 

[ben236]

the best quote from the article was this though

A universal basic income would go a long way towards ensuring all Americans can have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as promised way back in 1776. Some may disagree with the notion of an unconditional cash grant, or object to it going to everyone. Just don’t say we can’t afford it.

We can't afford it.

 

[ben236]

I think it might be necessary in the distant future should we develop true AI and advance automation enough. What if we find ourselves in a world where even doctors and engineers and computer scientists are obsolete because of automation/AI? A world where a select few ho already had money or became wealthy through automation, the Bill Gates of AI for instance, have any wealth and the rest of us can't even get work collecting trash, flipping burgers, or even as scientists? I think that redistributing the vast wealth generated by society would be the best course of action to prevent mass poverty.

This is assuming the AI don't go all Skynet on us. If that happens we'll be even further from a universal basic income then we are now.

Oh god... Liberals have been making this argument for centuries. And for centuries conservatives have been telling them that they're wrong. And for centuries they've always had the same reply...

But this time is different .

 

[Islam Imamate]

Oh god... Liberals have been making this argument has been made for centuries. But this time is different .

You don't think it will be different when true AI come along? AI capable of putting doctors, engineers, and scientists out of work? Perhaps a universal basic income won't be the answer to that monumental change but I do think our society will look radically different.

 

[ben236]

You don't think it will be different when true AI come along? AI capable of putting doctors, engineers, and scientists out of work? Perhaps a universal basic income won't be the answer to that monumental change but I do think our society will look radically different.

Technological advancements will cause their jobs to change and evolve like they always have.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

We can't afford it.

we can if we can simplify the tax code in all major countries which will eliminate loopholes for rich people to take advantage of

if you actually read the article, you wouldve known this

 

[IDL]

Maybe they could implement the Cloward-Piven strategy to force it in.

"The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward–Piven_strategy

Devious! Just break the system and purposely go broke.

 

[kpt018]

It would obviously depend on the details but a basic or guaranteed income to replace SS & welfare could be a tremendous improvement over those programs and could seem fair even to right wingers.

I'm making up a number here but you can't complain that poor folks get $15k a year when you get it too.

 

[SammyPops]

no dice. some people and jobs are meant to be poor. sorry but true.

on the other hand, I am sure people would work just as hard if a walmart cashier made the same income as a teacher who makes the same income as a MD.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Technological advancements will cause their jobs to change and evolve like they always have.

Technological advancements have lead to some sectors shrinking like manufacturing. If the advancements reaches a point where even highly skilled jobs find themselves competing with automation things can get interesting. A true AI could theoretically threaten many highly skilled jobs. Its even worse if AI develops to a point where it can take over its own development.

 

[mac11]

Technological advancements will cause their jobs to change and evolve like they always have.

No. This time is different.

Historically machines replaced our muscles and we went into thinking jobs. Now they are beginning to replace those and will surpass our cognitive abilities as well.

A basic income isn't only a leftist ideal either. It was supported by Milton Friedman and Hayek to name two.

I've just finished reading 'Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future' by martin ford. Excellent book.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

Technological advancements will cause their jobs to change and evolve like they always have.

No offense but you need to read up on whats coming, the number of professions that could be taken over by artificial intelligence and or robotics in the not to distant future is staggering.

Ive thought for some time that looking down the road a bit it's either universal basic income or a dystopia, i prefer ubi personally

 

[ben236]

we can if we can simplify the tax code in all major countries which will eliminate loopholes for rich people to take advantage of

if you actually read the article, you wouldve known this

Tell you what, according to this, there are 318,857,056 people living in the US in 2014.
23.1% (73,655,980) being under 18
14.5% (46,234,273) being 65 and over.

Which leaves 198,966,803 people ages 18-64 who would be eligible for basic income.
Multiply that number by a modest $20,000 (which is still under the poverty line and no where near a living wage for people with dependents) and that adds up to almost 4 trillion dollars. Which means that you would essentially have to double the federal budget.

So yes, this is not affordable.

 

[panamaican]

no dice. some people and jobs are meant to be poor. sorry but true.

on the other hand, I am sure people would work just as hard if a walmart cashier made the same income as a teacher who makes the same income as a MD.

Or people might gravitate towards jobs where they're passionate about the work instead of working for just a paycheck. So a teacher would work just as hard because, wait for it....he/she actually likes teaching. Crazy, I know but let the idea germinate a little and you find you like it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

No. This time is different.

Historically machines replaced our muscles and we went into thinking jobs. Now they are beginning to replace those and will surpass our cognitive abilities as well.

That's a better way of saying it. Best case scenario is that jobs within computer science and IT remains open to humans but what if AI develops to the point that they can take over even their own development/maintenance?

 

[ben236]

No. This time is different.

It always is according to liberals.

Historically machines replaced our muscles and we went into thinking jobs. Now they are beginning to replace those and will surpass our cognitive abilities as well.

A basic income isn't left either. It was supported by Milton Friedman and Hayek to name two.

I've just finished reading 'Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future' by martin ford. Excellent book.

Machines will make up an increasing share of the economy as the share humans take decreases. That has always been the case. But a smaller piece of the pie is fine as long as the pie keeps growing.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Technological advancements will cause their jobs to change and evolve like they always have.

Tell you what, according to this, there are 318,857,056 people living in the US in 2014.
23.1% (73,655,980) being under 18
14.5% (46,234,273) being 65 and over.

Which leaves 198,966,803 people ages 18-64 who would be eligible for basic income.
Multiply that number by a modest $20,000 (which is still under the poverty line and no where near a living wage for people with dependents) and that adds up to almost 4 trillion dollars. Which means that you would essentially have to double the federal budget.

So yes, this is not affordable.

from the same article

The Tax Justice Network estimates the global elite are sitting on $21–32tn of untaxed assets. Clearly, only a portion of that is owed to the US or any other nation in taxes – the highest tax bracket in the US is 39.6% of income. But consider that a small universal income of $2,000 a year to every adult in the US – enough to keep some people from missing a mortgage payment or skimping on food or medicine – would cost only around $563bn each year.

A larger income, to ensure that no American fell into absolute abject poverty – say, $12,000 a year – would cost around $3.6tn. That is a big number, but one that once again seems far more reasonable when considered through the lens of the Panama Papers and the scandal of global tax evasion. Because the truth is that we have all been robbed, systematically, by the world’s wealthiest people, for decades. They have used those stolen dollars to build yet more wealth for themselves, and all the while we have been arguing with ourselves over what to do with the leftover pennies.

so yes it is affordable, all it would take is for the people in control to actually change the laws to make these practices illegal. you just dont want to accept it because it goes against what you believe, even if what you believe is incorrect

 

[MayhemMonkey]

no dice. some people and jobs are meant to be poor. sorry but true.

anyone working full time hours should not be living below the poverty line

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Or people might gravitate towards jobs where they're passionate about the work instead of working for just a paycheck. So a teacher would work just as hard because, wait for it....he/she actually likes teaching. Crazy, I know but let the idea germinate a little and you find you like it.

exactly, people would be free to persue their dreams/interests.

but right-wingers only love freedom when it gives them the right to discriminate