The Universal Basic Income; Does anyone on the planet have any idea how such a scheme would even work?

[Snsl153]

In other words, the government will own you.

Now, perhaps I'm just not up to date with certain refinements that have been made to the general idea since it was first proposed, but if we have a system where everyone is just given a set amount of money on a certain day of the week on a regular and sustained basis, wouldn't that just encourage idleness and a corresponding drop in the taxes that would be used to fund the scheme in the first place? Who will actually pay for all of this largesse? How will it be funded?

I've heard it said that in order to compensate for the horrendous cost of the programme, all other welfare payments will be done away with, and replaced by this clunky, one-size-fits-all scheme, but something tells me that even if abolishing every other form of welfare payment actually did cover the costs involved (and I highly doubt that), wouldn't it make far more sense to use the money instead to develop programmes that would actually encourage more participation in the workforce, rather than less?

I don't know. I'll leave this now to you, the experts of GAG :D

[Soteris]

Well first of all, we actually have real world examples such as the test done in Finland between 2017-2018. To summarize their results they basically concluded that people who received universal basic income was less stressed, less depressed, less lonely, happier etc.. There was also some evidence that they worked more. Of note however is that Finland is very different from USA as an example. For example, the results also showed that people in Finland was not suppressed by financial or bureaucratic reasons which people probably are in USA which would give a much better result on this aspect in particular.

So no, there will not be less people in the work force. As for paying more into the system? I think one of the arguments for why Finland is interested in trying Universal Basic Income is specifically because calculating and paying out individual social benefits such as to elderly or people with disabilities is very costly compared to just giving everyone the same amount or more without having to evaluate if they need it or not.

It is very likely that is it going to replace wages to some degree. As an example, if you give a universal basic income equivalent to a minimum wage then the company would not have to pay you as much to give you a good standard of living and instead pay you through taxes. As such, with people working the same amount or even more and the wages plus Universal Basic Income being basically the same as your normal wage there is no real real hole in the budget that needs to be filled. The money is already there today, just a question of reallocating it.

Of course that is just one example and a Universal Basic Income probably have very different benefits and strengths from a private wage based economy so running them the same would be a waste of its potential. This is just an example put forward to show that it is possible with minimal changes to the point where society functions exactly the same.

[Chazmatazz269]

Less participation in the workforce isn’t a choice. It’s an absolute inevitability. Computers and machines are replacing workers rapidly. If companies still expect to sell their wares, some form of UBI will be a necessity in the near future. Essentially, every company that eliminates human workers should have to pay into the system, not unlike unemployment. That’s just one hypothetical though. Any company and government entity that benefits from eminent domain should have to pay as well, not unlike the Alaskan resources program.
Since there ARE countries effectively utilizing some form of basic income, we know a great deal about what works and how. Including the myth that UBI promotes idleness and limits productivity.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-universal-basic-income

[purplepoppy]

The key phrase is "level sufficient for subsistence". I suspect governments would set that pretty low, much lower than you could really exist on. For example a British politician recently claimed you could feed yourself on 30p a day.
I doubt UBI would cover most people's rent, bills, clothing expenses etc let alone feed them.

[Avicenna]

Well, thanks to the Bidenflation, $1000 isn't that much anymore, so people won't be able to live on it alone. But let's think about how much money that actually is.

1k a month per person would currently be at least 330 billion dollars a month, or about $4 trillion a year. And that's assuming people won't come to the US illegally to get it.

The Congressional Budget Office projects that federal spending this year will be $5.8 trillion, which is 24% of the entire economy. The budget deficit in 2021 was $2.8 trillion. so where would we come up with an additional $4 trillion? Well, the Fed would print it, of course, which would fuel yet more inflation and shrink the size of the real economy.

For those who think that taxes could be raised by $4 trillion to pay for UBI, dream on. And remember that is on top of what is already a huge and unsustainable budget deficit.

But what I could see is the government withholding part or all of the UBI from people the Democrats don't like. They could institute fines, for example, or withhold payments for using too many fossil fuels.

[KostasKouvalis]

Yeah I agree with the last part. I've never bothered to research how this will actually be paid for, and so far I believe Finland is the only country where this has actually worked. But you have to remember Finland only has like 3 million people, compared to a country like the US that has 300 million. How are you gonna pay all those people? Also, Finnish people have much stronger work ethic than Americans. Sorry I am using the US as an example, since I live here and this is the only place I can really compare to. Anyways, in a country like America I feel this would only encourage laziness and freeloading. You're basically giving people free money, and we already saw what happened with all the Covid relief. There are people who still refuse to go back to work. I know Stockton was gonna try it, but I honestly don't remember if they ever did or not. It sounds nice on paper, but in reality, it will only encourage people to not work, which is bad for everyone.

I agree with you that that money would be much better utilized towards welfare programs, because we all know most of that money isn't gonna go towards food or other living costs. So I think better would be MY idea, use that money to provide free food, water and shelter to every American.

[BoobMan]

Great question! It seems to me like you hear a lot of noise about how UBI would be distributed or funded, but you never hear anything convincing as to WHAT PROBLEM IS THIS SUPPOSED TO SOLVE? To me that's the dead giveaway that it's a terrible idea.

If you ever actually got around to naming a specific problem you WOULD like to solve (for example reducing extreme poverty) you're pretty much guaranteed to be able to find a better policy tool than UBI to fix that problem after thinking about it for about 15 seconds (e. g., give money to the extremely poor rather than to everyone).

I have yet to hear ANY problem where the best solution would be anything remotely similar to UBI.

[Avicenna]

Exactly- supplement the incomes of the poor. That is doable.

[BoobMan]

@Avicenna True, but we already have programs that do that. So it's really not clear what problem this policy is even supposed to solve.

[Avicenna]

I think, unfortunately, that we need to supplement them some more, but you're right there are existing programs in place and it should be done through them.

[BoobMan]

@Avicenna Sure--and that's a reasonable position, the answer to which would be "increase welfare and/or unemployment payments."

[Avicenna]

True

[Ironic_Method]

It can work, but personal greed will prevent it. Right now we have the technology to far outproduce what we need, but instead of using technology for efficiency and better quality of life for all... we do the opposite.

If you look to the past where 40 hour work weeks could feed a family of 4 on minimum wage, our efficiency has increased over 200% from 60 years ago and yet... we now work more and earn less on average.

I feel like those who oppose UBI don't understand the massive accumulation of wealth the richest people have.

[msc545]

This is essentially welfare, which is usually calculated to be an amount such that nobody could live comfortably or even adequately on it, since in Capitalist economies it is an article of faith that *nobody should ever get anything for free, not even life, much less food or shelter or healthcare or anything else*. Instead, all must work for the Capitalists at whatever penurious, inadequate wages they deign to pay.

Ever wonder what starts revolutions? This sort of thinking does.

[msc545]

Also - do you want to consider "horrendous cost"? Try considering the US military budget - 800 BILLION for one year. Socialism for defense contractors.

[Snsl153]

"... nobody should ever get anything for free..."
Well, nothing is free, apart from the air we breathe. Someone, somewhere along the line, has to pay for the services that are offered for "free". Welfare isn't free, it's a payment that is given to help those most in need while they are in need. When, or if, they no longer need the payments, the payments should cease.
Everything costs money. That's just an unfortunate fact of reality. To deny this fact is to live in some weird, parallel universe where nothing ever has any cost.
And if you think that capitalism is so bad, well, you're always free to defect to North Korea, Cuba or Venezuela, where socialism has just been such a stunning success! LOL :D

[zagor]

The people actually employed by defense contractors actually do something. A lot of commercial applications were initially developed by defense contractors. Most of the money goes to the EMPLOYEES of the contractors.

[msc545]

@zagor yes. They make weapons to kill people and ruin their countries.

[msc545]

right. Let's incentivize people with the threat of starvation.

[zagor]

Right. Like there were no wars before modern weaponry was developed. Unfortunately killing has been going on since it was by tooth and nail. Better to be the one with the advantage.

But I suppose you would rather blame the weapons rather than the flawed humans who decide how to use them.

[CALIGVLA]

It's part of the "You will own nothing, and you will be happy"-shitfuckery.

I bet money if the government implemented the UBI policy, inflation would go up and they'd take away other welfare policies from us. Well, it's not like we have real welfare policies in the US, but anyway.

[exitseven]

The government just keeps printing more and more money until it will take a wheelbarrow full of cash to buy a loaf of bread.

[Snsl153]

I read somewhere that 40% of all the cash that has ever been printed in the entire history of the United States was printed in just the last year. Absolutely horrifying if true.

[exitseven]

I bet it is true. Nobody has a real feel for how much a trillion dollars is.

[msc545]

Let's make sure the government never again prints any money at all. We can go back to bartering.

[exitseven]

@msc545 once the iRS starts coming after us all that will probably happen. I sort of know a group of people that barter with each other for services. This was 10 -15 years ago.

[Reaper1985]

UBI is flawed in a similar way to how minimum wage is flawed. the more money that gets handed out to people that didn't earn it. the more inflation hurts everyone while also increasing the cost of goods and services.

same with raising taxes on the rich because they will just raise prices to cover their yearly loses.

[joeldalton]

I don’t know how you can look at the clusterfuck of paying people not to work during the pandemic and think it would be any different with UBI

[Snsl153]

Exactly! Now many people don't want to return to work, because they've lost the incentive to.

[Wade12345]

you tax sinfully rich people who make like 500k per year or more and you redistribute it to poor and middle class people. Easy.

[Snsl153]

Now why should we do that? Why $500,000 and not some other figure? Who will get to decide this?

[zagor]

Why should people get paid for existing? We don't need lazy people being encouraged to make more babies.

[U4ea0]

It will work by forcing companies to pay more for jobs that a 16 year old kid can do. We don't want this crap.

[In_Trance]

This has existed in Canada for years.
It doesn't work. plain and simple.

[TheoPfeifle]

Look at the nations who have implemented it... Yes, people have had success with a ubi system.

[888theGreat]

It works by increasing inflation like all those stimulus checks. So , you get $1000 and food prices increases .

[QuietRunner]

First the tax system must be changed to the Automated Deposit Tax or Tiny Tax to fund it

and then cut lots of payments

[userxvi]

You'll own nothing live in a pod, eat bugs and be happy

[jshm2]

You mean how the scheme works in oil rich nations like Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia?

You need to educate yourself better, son.

[Snsl153]

Son? In any case, the nations you listed there are so filthy-rich from oil revenue that I know that one of those (Saudi Arabia) doesn't even tax its citizens, because it doesn't need to. It's all very well to spend money like there's no tomorrow if you happen to be so rich that it seems as though it doesn't even matter, but money doesn't grow on trees, and I've often wondered what will become of the Gulf States when oil isn't valuable anymore, when it starts to dry up and people no longer need it, which is something that will happen one day even if not in the immediate, foreseeable future.

[ElementoP]

Hey, you leave this beautiful girl alone!
She's a gift from God

[Dargil]

Who would pay for it?

[ElementoP]

Exactly. I believe it was Margaret Thatcher that said "the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"

[macjets007]

Yes. In short, modern communism lol

[imfreeze95]

It wouldn’t work