Basic Universal Income (BUI)

[dimreepr]

sorry, broken keyboard, my point is what happens when you can't work?

8 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

However by that metric everyone is inferior to automatic/AI.

Precisely.

[Ten oz]

11 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Precisely

Which is an argument for a different metric. 

[dimreepr]

Will that be followed?

[studiot]

28 minutes ago, Sensei said:

This experiment was a joke, to be honest.

 

At least they weren't fiddling the figures, like they do so much of in this country.

Do they have anything like I, Daniel Blake in Finland?

[Ten oz]

21 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Will that be followed?

Regardless of how we look at the numbers wages do not keep up with GDP. Or to say it another way the amount of purchasing power individuals have is not proportional to the total productivity (goods or services produced) of the economy. Greater performance and greater corporate value doesn't guarantee greater economic stability for individuals. Not surprisingly the big shift between GDP and pay stated widening in the 80's. That is when a focus on Market Value became the primary metric for economic health. The mantra for 40yrs has been that making companies more profitable will produce more jobs, better wage, and etc. It has worked. Instead we have just produced a culture of cooperate greed which sees itself as entitled to billions in trade for minimum paying employment.  

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

Regardless of how we look at the numbers wages do not keep up with GDP. Or to say it another way the amount of purchasing power individuals have is not proportional to the total productivity (goods or services produced) of the economy. Greater performance and greater corporate value doesn't guarantee greater economic stability for individuals. Not surprisingly the big shift between GDP and pay stated widening in the 80's. That is when a focus on Market Value became the primary metric for economic health. The mantra for 40yrs has been that making companies more profitable will produce more jobs, better wage, and etc. It has worked. Instead we have just produced a culture of cooperate greed which sees itself as entitled to billions in trade for minimum paying employment.  

3

 I see what you meant.

[Ten oz]

Democratic Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang and Sam Harris discussed a $1,000 monthly universal income on Sam's podcast several months ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9wvOv7_Evc.

Yang's position (as I understand it) is that because $1,000 a month isn't enough money to live on it would be used in addition to employment to enable individuals to go back to school, start businesses, and etc. Yang ties in the gig economy and role automation has in transforming the employment landscape. I view the issue of automation as a bit of a separate discussion though. The idea of a basic universal income predates AI and the current state of automation. 

I think Yang is correct that most people who are already working would use the $1,000 a month to afford things they currently cannot. The money would boost consumer spending which itself helps create more jobs. However I still feel that a Basic Universal Income would further disadvantage poor people.

Those living in middle class communities general have comfortable places to live even when they do not  individually make much money. People in middle class communities can often live with relatives or friends who have large homes, have extra vehicles they can use, plenty of food,  and can accommodate them without strain. For those individuals a $1,000 a month can be saved, put towards a business, pay for education, and etc. The extra income may very well be just what they need to elevate their situation as so much else is already being subsidies by relatives and friends.  

For poor people, those living in poverty,  I think it is a different story. No one in their communities can afford to help them. They do not have relatives with large homes, friends with spare cars, and etc. These communities are also more heavily policed and pay higher prices for nearly everything because businesses view servicing them as carrying more risk. Healthcare in the U.S. is a still primarily operates for profit so Individuals with any number of medical conditions (mental health, physical disabilities, addiction) live in poverty. A $1,000 a month won't dig people living in poverty out of the holes they are in. A $1,000 a month would quickly be absorbed. A single prescription of medicine might cost a $1,000 a month and still leave a poor person several prescriptions short of what they need. 

BUI would obvious have no impact of wealthy people, would help elevate middle class (upper and lower) communities, and would do nothing for poor people. I think it would grow the distance between middle class people and poor people and in the long run make things worse. 

 

[iNow]

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

[UBI] would do nothing for poor people

Cannot agree with you here.

At the very least, those working 3 jobs could instead work just 2, opening time with children to practice reading and allowing improved nutrition.

I understand what you’re saying more broadly, but feel you’re potentially framing the issue too narrowly in support of an existing conclusion. This is one tool among many available.

Don’t dismiss the power of the hammer merely because it’s not also a screwdriver or frying pan. 

It also matters how the legislation is drafted. It can be means tested and applied differently at different income levels. Let’s not get hung up on the “universal” label. 

[dimreepr]

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

Cannot agree with you here.

At the very least, those working 3 jobs could instead work just 2, opening time with children to practice reading and allowing improved nutrition.

I understand what you’re saying more broadly, but feel you’re potentially framing the issue too narrowly in support of an existing conclusion. This is one tool among many available.

Don’t dismiss the power of the hammer merely because it’s not also a screwdriver or frying pan. 

It also matters how the legislation is drafted. It can be means tested and applied differently at different income levels. Let’s not get hung up on the “universal” label. 

 

most workers get hung up on the they don't work label.

[Ten oz]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Cannot agree with you here.

At the very least, those working 3 jobs could instead work just 2, opening time with children to practice reading and allowing improved nutrition.

I understand what you’re saying more broadly, but feel you’re potentially framing the issue too narrowly in support of an existing conclusion. This is one tool among many available.

Don’t dismiss the power of the hammer merely because it’s not also a screwdriver or frying pan. 

It also matters how the legislation is drafted. It can be means tested and applied differently at different income levels. Let’s not get hung up on the “universal” label. 

In my experience someone who works 3 jobs isn't living in poverty. Rather the 3 jobs serve to keep them above water at the lower levels of middle class. A person working 3 jobs more often than not has help. Someone is watching their kids while they are out all day working. Someone with 3 jobs more often than not is healthy enough to work all day. In my experience people with multiple jobs are often using the different jobs for various things. One job might offer a superior family healthcare plan while, the second better pay, and the third a more desirable long term career. Few, if any, of the people I have known who worked multiple jobs at once were doing so strictly for the money. I agree 100% that an additional $1,000 a month would help that person. However in my opinion that person isn't a good example of those living in poverty. 

In my opinion the poorest communities in the U.S. need healthcare, criminal justice reform, and education reform. A $1,000 a month within our current system won't fix public schools in poor locations, won't afford people the healthcare they need, and won't keep politicians from winning elections on the promise of putting poor people in prison. 

None of this is to say some form of Basic Income can't work. However I rather focus on things like healthcare. Things I believe without a doubt would significantly help everyone.

[iNow]

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

In my opinion the poorest communities in the U.S. need healthcare, criminal justice reform, and education reform. A $1,000 a month within our current system won't fix public schools in poor locations, won't afford people the healthcare they need, and won't keep politicians from winning elections on the promise of putting poor people in prison. 

We seem to agree on all but one thing. You imply they’re mutually exclusive. I advocate doing these things in parallel. Bubble gum chewing and walking at same time...

[Ten oz]

9 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

most workers get hung up on the they don't work label.

Some people cannot work. Whether it's an age related health conditions or disability present since birth or following a traumatic event many people physically/mentally cannot work in the prescribed manner the majority of jobs demand. Our current system has no answer for that reality. I think all they posters involved in this discussion understand that.

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

In my experience someone who works 3 jobs isn't living in poverty. Rather the 3 jobs serve to keep them above water at the lower levels of middle class. A person working 3 jobs more often than not has help. Someone is watching their kids while they are out all day working. Someone with 3 jobs more often than not is healthy enough to work all day. In my experience people with multiple jobs are often using the different jobs for various things. One job might offer a superior family healthcare plan while, the second better pay, and the third a more desirable long term career. Few, if any, of the people I have known who worked multiple jobs at once were doing so strictly for the money. I agree 100% that an additional $1,000 a month would help that person. However in my opinion that person isn't a good example of those living in poverty. 

In my opinion the poorest communities in the U.S. need healthcare, criminal justice reform, and education reform. A $1,000 a month within our current system won't fix public schools in poor locations, won't afford people the healthcare they need, and won't keep politicians from winning elections on the promise of putting poor people in prison. 

None of this is to say some form of Basic Income can't work. However I rather focus on things like healthcare. Things I believe without a doubt would significantly help everyone.

10

3 jobs mean 2 jobs aren't enough.

[Ten oz]

21 minutes ago, iNow said:

We seem to agree on all but one thing. You imply they’re mutually exclusive. I advocate doing these things in parallel. Bubble gum chewing and walking at same time...

3yrs ago I would have agreed. Sadly I no longer do. In the current political climate we cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. The ideas most viewed and most shared are the ones currently most likely to succeed. Harris, Warren, Booker, and etc have a finite amount of engagement time between now and Nov. 3rd 2020. All of the candidates combined will receive half the press Trump alone will receive. A finite amount of things voters will hear them say. Each new thing they add to the plate dilutes the time of other items. 

 

 

16 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

3 jobs mean 2 jobs aren't enough.

Right, but for different reasons. One job might offer healthcare but only pay $8 an hour. Another might pay $18 an hour but not offer healthcare. So a parent might work the $8 an hour job so their children have healthcare but get their main income from the $18 job. This is especially true in the gig economy.  It isn't simple as more jobs equaling more money. Families has a variety of needs. 

Edited March 3, 2019 by Ten oz

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Right, but for different reason. One job might offer healthcare but only pay $8 an hour. Another might pay $18 an hour but not offer healthcare. So a parent might work the $8 an hour job so their children have healthcare but getyir main income from the $18 job. This is especially true in the gig economy.  It isn't simple as more jobs equally more money.

4

Ah yes, the American Dream.

[Ten oz]

5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Ah yes, the American Dream.

Uniquely American and fantastic! 

 

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Uniquely American and fantastic! 

 

 

It is fantastic you Dream with so little sleep.