Universal Basic Income (California...of course...)

[Robinson]

Did you read the link?

Yes sir I did. I don't buy the whole idea that people who receive the minimum income will do the right thing even if working means being more financially rewarded than not working. And in that scenario the people who work are directly working to fund the non-workers up until a certain point of earnings.

I don't like it. Of course, I don't like the way things are with entitlement programs now either. When my wife and I lived on $500/mo I did whatever was necessary to claw my way upward into a better situation. Including going weeks without seeing my wife and child because of working long hours in an agricultural job as I paid my way through college. If someone is not willing to do that then they don't deserve jack shit from the taxpayers.

Crap. Ya know, BBI -- I realize you are not some dumbass. I'm just a little cranky today because of this damn screeching in my ears -- I shouldn't be arguing with you about this.

[txdpd]

I wonder how much of that $500 will be used for things that are strictly necessities.

I wonder how likely it is that the recipients will gladly give up their $500/mo after the trial period.

I wonder if this will make the recipients more likely to seek gainful employment.

I wonder if California taxpayers will receive Christmas cards from the recipients of the $500/mo.

I wonder if California wonders any of these things.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so I'm sure that the 100 people selected, were not carefully selected to show that a UBI would be used responsibly and only to the benefit of the recipients and society. Meanwhile over here it'll be another day in the annual rendition of used car sales repo wars, where people drop there tax returns, without a second thought, on a clapped out POS that they could not afford.

[blues]

Crap. Ya know, BBI -- I realize you are not some dumbass. I'm just a little cranky today because of this damn screeching in my ears -- I shouldn't be arguing with you about this.

BBI has a talent for being both humorous and provocative. By using that talent he (often) elicits interesting comments that move the dialogue along.

You don't have to agree. You just have to state your case...which you have done and it has helped move the dialogue forward for the rest of us.

Mission accomplished. (imho)

[BehindBlueI's]

Yes sir I did. I don't buy the whole idea that people who receive the minimum income will do the right thing even if working means being more financially rewarded than not working. And in that scenario the people who work are directly working to fund the non-workers up until a certain point of earnings.

I don't like it. Of course, I don't like the way things are with entitlement programs now either. When my wife and I lived on $500/mo I did whatever was necessary to claw my way upward into a better situation. Including going weeks without seeing my wife and child because of working long hours in an agricultural job as I paid my way through college. If someone is not willing to do that then they don't deserve jack shit from the taxpayers.

Crap. Ya know, BBI -- I realize you are not some dumbass. I'm just a little cranky today because of this damn screeching in my ears -- I shouldn't be arguing with you about this.

It's ok, honestly, you aren't going to offend me by not agreeing with me. I'd just point out that the vast majority of current welfare recipients are working. Wages haven't kept up with the economy, and benefits are steadily declining. My health insurance is a fucking joke compared to my maternal grandfather's benefits from GE where he was a union machinist. At least I still have a pension plan...

We're mostly subsidizing the working poor under either the current approach or the UBI alternative. There are alternate ways to do it. Minimum wage laws, for example. Welfare/social programs are how we currently approach it, but a UBI is an alternative.

With the understanding economics is a soft science, the studies in the link suggest that it isn't as costly as you'd think because it prevents bigger expenditures down the road. Keeping a kid out of the criminal justice system when he's a young adult saves money, for example. Sort of like free immunizations is cheaper than dealing with sick people.

I don't know that it will work, but I don't think what we are doing now is sustainable long term. More and more wealth is accumulating at the top, reducing the economic mobility. The last time this happened in our country coincides with strong pushes for communism, a maximum wage, etc. People will let wealth accumulate, but once they see mobility stopping...then things go sideways.

[cheby]

This is yet another example of a junk science. Such observational studies with small samples and short time periods are so common in social and medical fields.

[Robinson]

With the understanding economics is a soft science, the studies in the link suggest that it isn't as costly as you'd think because it prevents bigger expenditures down the road. Keeping a kid out of the criminal justice system when he's a young adult saves money, for example. Sort of like free immunizations is cheaper than dealing with sick people.

I don't pay criminals to not rob me or break into my house either. I guess I am reacting to the thing out of principle alone, whereas you are trying to discuss the nuances of the situation.

Thanks for the discussion.

[BehindBlueI's]

I don't pay criminals to not rob me or break into my house either. I guess I am reacting to the thing out of principle alone, whereas you are trying to discuss the nuances of the situation.

Thanks for the discussion.

No, but you pay *for* criminals to not rob you, etc. through the criminal justice system and the costs are pretty high.

Things like free public education have greatly increased the standard of living, economic mobility, and quality of society, and it's also a "welfare" program although we don't label it as such. We take it's existence for granted now, but forget that it was also controversial and decried at first. Do you have the same reaction to paying for poor children's schooling? Or do you believe it's a worthwhile use of tax money, that widespread literacy is good for democracy, etc? That educated and socially adapted people are less likely to become criminals? That paying to educate today is better than paying to jail tomorrow?

I get the principal thing, but let me ask you, if you were starting over today would that agricultural job still be a realistic option for you? Would it pay enough to allow you to go to college? I know most of the jobs I did aren't real options any longer. Illegals and/or machines took them over. You can't throw hay or cut tobacco and put yourself through school. Depending on where you live, you might be able to work for UPS or Amazon part time and get tuition assistance, but if you grow up rural poor that's probably not an option.

Personally, I'm very grateful I am settled in life now and started out when I did. I'd hate to be starting out today, especially from the hole of poverty.

[Drang]

Just an observation: I am all in favor of experiments that will drain the pocketbooks of the Tom Steyers and George Soros' of the world. Can't have a large enough study pool, really.

[willie]

I get my money out of the mailbox too.

[WobblyPossum]

The only thing I’ve firmly decided from reading this thread is that I want to hang out with BBI.


–————————————————
My posts only represent my opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of my employer. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.