• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Guaranteed Basic Income

Deacon923

Deacon923

Scooter Banks
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
11,136
Reaction score
1,052
Location
Greensboro, NC
This concept is getting a little play in some corners of the GOP/Libertarian world right now.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/the-key-for-conservative-anti-poverty-plans-keep-it-simple/375392/

I think the chances of such a wide-reaching reform ever happening in the current political environment are essentially zero, but thought it might be fun to discuss here.

The concept was supported by such conservative icons as William F. Buckley, Freidrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman, and Nixon tried to implement it. The concept would be to wipe out all the myriad forms of means-tested aid run by a sprawling, paternalistic bureaucracy, and simply provide a cash grant to all Americans to spend as they wish. One thing the articles above miss is they don't go far enough - they only talk about a Federal overhaul. If you were to include all the means-tested programs run by states and cities, the amount spent on poverty relief is more than enough to pay every poor American an annual amount equal to the poverty line. Wiping out all of that and replacing it with a simple grant would do wonders for the economy (and put a whole bunch of bureaucrats out of work).
 
It's not "basic income" but Sarah Palin's beloved Alaska already provides yearly dividends to all citizens. Couple thousand, IIRC. No restrictions on how to spend. But you're right- this will be a purely academic discussion.
 
151-1-4.jpg
 
Good thread and good ideas. I'll post more detail on my ideas later. Paying out a minimum as negative taxes and collecting it back through taxes makes sense.
 
The inherent problem with the one check system without means testing is that there would still be a vast need for a medical safety net.

Think about this of this scenario. A poor person is currently on welfare, food stamps, Section 8 and Medicaid. If that person has one child and only got a check for $10-12,000, that person and the child would be on the streets, have no food and no healthcare.

The only way this can work is if it's means tested and the check is much, much bigger. Plus, without a grant for healthcare, millions will be without it.

It can't work with everyone getting a check. It can't work without a healthcare plank.

For Ryan and his conservative friends, it's a very cynical way to hurt the poor for whom they have no interest.
 
Deacon923 said:
hopefully, something productive that adds value to the economy. they'll have their basic income to fall back on in the short term.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Deacon923 said:
hopefully, something productive that adds value to the economy. they'll have their basic income to fall back on in the short term.
Click to expand...

good point, bureaucrats doing nothing is better for the economy that when they are "working"

I like this plan, for other reasons as well, but tell me more
 
Deacon923 said:
This concept is getting a little play in some corners of the GOP/Libertarian world right now.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/the-key-for-conservative-anti-poverty-plans-keep-it-simple/375392/

I think the chances of such a wide-reaching reform ever happening in the current political environment are essentially zero, but thought it might be fun to discuss here.

The concept was supported by such conservative icons as William F. Buckley, Freidrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman, and Nixon tried to implement it. The concept would be to wipe out all the myriad forms of means-tested aid run by a sprawling, paternalistic bureaucracy, and simply provide a cash grant to all Americans to spend as they wish. One thing the articles above miss is they don't go far enough - they only talk about a Federal overhaul. If you were to include all the means-tested programs run by states and cities, the amount spent on poverty relief is more than enough to pay every poor American an annual amount equal to the poverty line. Wiping out all of that and replacing it with a simple grant would do wonders for the economy (and put a whole bunch of bureaucrats out of work).
Click to expand...

The only thing I can think about that's in place currently that would be similar to this are per caps within Native American Reservations. Per caps are a disaster.
 
These are all fine ideas $20T in debt repayment from now. Until then? Notsomuch.
 
I like the concept in theory, but the practical problem is that people won't spend it on what they should spend it on (food, clothing, healthcare, housing, etc) and will blow it on other crap (cell plans, cigs, rims). Then they will whine that they don't have the basic necessities, and our pussy politicians will end up giving them food stamps and medicaid in addition to the checks. So we will be right back where we are now, just spending a lot more money. Believe me, I would love for it to work, I just don't trust that we will have the balls to tell people that they got all they are getting and that it is their problem to figure out how best to use it.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I like the concept in theory, but the practical problem is that people won't spend it on what they should spend it on (food, clothing, healthcare, housing, etc) and will blow it on other crap (cell plans, cigs, rims). Then they will whine that they don't have the basic necessities, and our pussy politicians will end up giving them food stamps and medicaid in addition to the checks. So we will be right back where we are now, just spending a lot more money. Believe me, I would love for it to work, I just don't trust that we will have the balls to tell people that they got all they are getting and that it is their problem to figure out how best to use it.
Click to expand...

Tell me more about your stereotypes.
 
That thing also is an authorized federal function (remember the Constitution? Anyone?), has substantial international funding (see the decals on the photo you copied and posted) and as noted, actually works.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I like the concept in theory, but the practical problem is that people won't spend it on what they should spend it on (food, clothing, healthcare, housing, etc) and will blow it on other crap (cell plans, cigs, rims). Then they will whine that they don't have the basic necessities, and our pussy politicians will end up giving them food stamps and medicaid in addition to the checks. So we will be right back where we are now, just spending a lot more money. Believe me, I would love for it to work, I just don't trust that we will have the balls to tell people that they got all they are getting and that it is their problem to figure out how best to use it.
Click to expand...

Tough shit. To me part of the appeal is that we need to stop treating adults as children. Another part of the appeal is that some - I hope a good many - stuck in the rut of dependence will take the chance for a new start and excape that rut.
 
jhmd2000 said:
That thing also is an authorized federal function (remember the Constitution? Anyone?), has substantial international funding (see the decals on the photo you copied and posted) and as noted, actually works.
Click to expand...

it has funding because we choose to dump money into toys instead of, you know, our actual human beings
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top