What would a basic income do?

[Masada]

Indeed. Under 25s are almost all students, living at home or in casual work - if you think many of those will be able to support a friend, even with the best will in the world, I invite you to meet a few!

I hope I'm this hip and cool when I grow up

 

[MagisterCultuum]

A Basic Income would be a big improvement, but a Citizens' Dividend would be better. A Basic Income is likely to cause inflation in particular for goods which have more inelastic supplies. Housing costs would rise, as land prices rise even more due to land's fixed supply. A Citizens' Dividend funded by land value taxes would capture the increasing land prices rather than letting landlords hoard the benefits of the basic income. It would slow the land price inflation while encouraging more economical land use and allowing the dividends to increase to keep up with inflation.

 

[Old Hippy]

A Citizens' Dividend funded by land value taxes would capture the increasing land prices rather than letting landlords hoard the benefits of the basic income. It would slow the land price inflation while encouraging more economical land use and allowing the dividends to increase to keep up with inflation.

just gotta say this idea is dumb...

as a soon to be self funded retiree, it would impose a tax on me that is not related to my ability to pay, I would have to sell my assett (house and land) to pay the tax...
and yes, it is my self interst I'm concerned about
but with high land prices where I live I have seen a lot of retired railway workers living in workers cottages having trouble just meeting the local council (reduced) rates bill as their close to $1,000,000 dollar house is thier only assett while they are living on about $200 a week
any tax, levy, charge has to be on income or we mught as well go back to taxing the number of windows a building has. which would leave poor people living in the dark even if they can afford more candles

 

[Shacassanach]

Every citizen gets $10,000 a year, no strings attached. What happens?

Hmm....inflation?

 

[Tani Coyote]

I think it would do a lot more good than a minimum wage on the basis that if the worker's financial well-being is supported by taxes rather than by individual businesses, the burden falls on big business rather than small. This is equitable, given the big businesses get more out of their dollars anyway.

Prices would of course rise between the taxation and more people buying (but this in itself would presumably lead to increased production which will keep prices stable), but is this really an issue provided actual buying power isn't affected in the long run?

The inflation would possibly be offset by a larger labor pool as a result of laying off a ton of government employees (and heck, probably some church employees too).

Never mind, not having to worry as much about getting mugged by the most down on their luck would be a nice perk.

This is all based on my memory of economics anyway.

 

[Cutlass]

Hmm....inflation?

Well, in a word, no. We've disposed of that strawman.

 

[Tahuti]

Well, in a word, no. We've disposed of that strawman.

Where exactly? Namecalling those who think that way doesn't count.

 

[Masada]

Here are three examples that involved no name calling and which make sense to me - an economist. I'm not sold either way but I think the inflationary effect, if any, would tend to be quite minor. In theory, I could model something like this at work if I can be bothered. (I'm not because I doubt the results would be all that interesting). Hydro who is also an economist doesn't think it'll be that significant if that matters all that much. In actual fact, the people I respect most on economic matters in OT don't think so either. So there's that, I guess as well.

 

[Harv]

Where exactly? Namecalling those who think that way doesn't count.

Somebody earlier put the bill at 2.8 Trillion. Taking that number at face value, that is 17.5% of a 16 Trillion economy. Excluding Social Security and Medicare, what is the current budget for social services?

 

[Cutlass]

Somebody earlier put the bill at 2.8 Trillion. Taking that number at face value, that is 17.5% of a 16 Trillion economy. Excluding Social Security and Medicare, what is the current budget for social services?

Most of the people pushing various basic income schemes aren't excluding Social Security and Medicare. Which is a whole different can of worms, since $10k isn't enough to cover private insurance. Let alone to have anything left to eat on afterwards.

If there were a phaseout of the benefit at some point, then it doesn't come out to much more than the federal, state, and local governments are already spending.

 

[Linkman226]

Can someone please explain why there would be inflation? No in is saying we should print money in order to finance BI. Why are all the anti BI folks foaming at the mouth over inflation?

 

[FriendlyFire]

I'm still not sure how you're supposed to increase consumption without increasing production. Or is this about spreading it around? Because I've seen it being sold as "well, it won't really cost us anything" by the basic incommies on the internet.

Inflation?

The only way it wont cost anything would be if the labour force was robotized and government was AI run. Japan is to have 1 Million robots within the decade so it might not be that far fetched. In which case I am coming to join you in Japan.

 

[Flying Pig]

You can increase consumption without increasing production if goods are being made but not used - say, in a wild hypothetical, supermarkets were throwing away out-of-date food or houses were being left empty because nobody who could afford to buy them wanted them. Or, if we take services as a 'good', if there are more people providing a service than wanting it, since changing that will increase the price of the service, meaning that they make more money for the same amount of work - though that is simply inflation.

 

[Cutlass]

We really aren't talking about much increase in consumption. There would be more shifting of consumption than increase in it. fewer luxuries, more middle class staples.

 

[Tahuti]

Inflation?

The only way it wont cost anything would be if the labour force was robotized and government was AI run. Japan is to have 1 Million robots within the decade so it might not be that far fetched. In which case I am coming to join you in Japan.

Inflation is not purely a supply-side phenomena.

 

[Harv]

Most of the people pushing various basic income schemes aren't excluding Social Security and Medicare. Which is a whole different can of worms, since $10k isn't enough to cover private insurance. Let alone to have anything left to eat on afterwards.

I was trying to compare the 2.8 Trillion figure for the basic income scheme to the current list of social services. I was excluding Social Security from the list because it is funded by employer and employee contributions and not by the general budget. I think Medicare is in the same category.

If there were a phaseout of the benefit at some point, then it doesn't come out to much more than the federal, state, and local governments are already spending.

This is kind of what I am thinking. I might try to look up some numbers later.

 

[El_Machinae]

Those of you who say the inflation will happen b/c people will leave the workforce might wanna see that line through: if they will leave because money incentives are that sensitive, and it actually did lead to large price increases, then inflation against a fixed 10k stipend means a bunch of those folks would just head right back to the workforce.

I wonder how much benefit could be gained by ratcheting the payments upwards inside of as through a big change one-off? If I were getting an extra $2k per year, I'd not work less, I'd just spend more. Sure, start giving me $30 per year and I might just quit with all the attending inflation shocks disrupting everything. But, a ratcheting system? Where people feel the pain of quitting?

 

[Linkman226]

I wonder how much benefit could be gained by ratcheting the payments upwards inside of as through a big change one-off?

What does this sentence mean? It's incoherent.

 

[Mise]

He just means that if we slowly switched over the a Basic Income by ratcheting up payments, rather than as a big one off change, would this mitigate the incentive to just quit work? So for example, if I got an extra $2k per year from the government, I probably wouldn't change my attitude to work. If I got an extra $2k increase every year for 5 years, so that at the end of 5 years I was $10k per year better off than I am now, this might reduce the incentive for me to avoid working more, compared with if I just got $10k extra in year 1.

 

[Hygro]

Naw he means shakin' that booty like a money maker.