Just Give People Free Money Already!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Easy E**

I saw this post and wanted to hear what fellow Dakkanauts thought about the idea.

Basically end poverty by giving away money.... for free! Crazy talk!

http://www.businessinsider.com/giving-all-americans-a-basic-income-would-end-poverty-2013-11?utm_source=slate&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=partner

A simple idea for eliminating poverty is garnering greater attention in recent weeks: automatically have the government give every adult a basic income.

The Atlantic's Matt Bruenig and Elizabeth Stoker brought up the idea a few weeks ago when they contemplated cutting poverty in half and Annie Lowrey revisited it today in the New York Times.

Real wages have been stagnant in America for decades now and income inequality has grown immensely.In the aftermath of the Great Recession, it’s only gotten worse. The Census Bureau reported in September that the 15 percent of Americans (46.5 million) live below the poverty line. Government benefits like food stamps and TANF help lift some of them above the line, but millions still live below it.

So here's what you need to know about it.

How would it work?

It’s exactly how it sounds. The government would mail every American over the age of 21 a check each month. That’s it. Everyone is free to do what they like with it.

How would it be funded?

In 2012, there were 179 million Americans between the ages of 21 and 65 (when Social Security would kick in). The poverty line was $11,945. Thus, giving each working-age American a basic income equal to the poverty line would cost $2.14 trillion. For some comparison, U.S. GDP was almost $16 trillion in 2012 and the defense budget was $700 billion.

But a minimum income would also allow us to eliminate every government benefit as well. Get rid of SNAP, TANF, housing vouchers, the Earned Income tax credit and many others. Get rid of them all. A 2012 Congressional Research Service report found that the federal government spends approximately $750 billion each year on benefits for low-income Americans and that rises to a clean trillion when you factor in state programs. Eliminate all of those and the net figure comes out to $1.2 trillion needed to pay for a universal basic income, still a hefty sum.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t ways to pay for it. The CBO found that a carbon tax would bring in nearly $100 billion a year for instance. Revenue would also increase automatically since everyone would have a basic income on which to pay taxes. The government could also offer a basic income of $6,000 a year instead of up to the poverty line. Funding a basic income for all working-age adults would not be easy and would require a substantial increase in the size of government, but it's not impossible either.

What are the benefits of a basic income?

The clear one is that no American would live below the poverty line. The U.S. has been waging the War on Poverty for a generation now and still nearly 50 million Americans are below the line. This would end that war with a decisive victory.

There are knock on effects as well. Americans would have greater leverage to demand higher wages and better working conditions from their employer thanks to the increased income security. Families could allow one parent to take time off to raise their kids. Eliminating the numerous different government welfare programs would also lead to efficiency gains as adults would simply receive their check in the mail and not have to waste time filling out paperwork at numerous different offices.

What are the drawbacks of a basic income?

Economists have long shuddered at the thought of a basic income, because it strongly disincentives work. However, a basic income is just that: basic. Most adults would continue to work to earn extra money. The employment effects would not be non-existent and there may be an increase in part-time work. As Lowrey points out, different studies have found the disincentive effects on work are not as strong as economists feared.

Are there any real world examples?

Perhaps in the near future. Switzerland’s citizens will soon vote on a referendum to give each working-age adult in Switzerland a basic income of $2,800 (2,500 francs) per month. Supporters of the initiative unloaded a dump truck of eight million coins, one for every Swiss citizen, after they successfully gained 125,000 signatures and triggered the referendum. Other countries have experimented with basic income in small areas, but none has done so throughout an entire country as Switzerland is considering. If the referendum passes, economists will certainly watch intently to see its effects.

Does it have a chance in Congress?

No. Congress can't even keep the government open or pass a budget, much less revamp our entire benefits program into a basic income. However, there is some bipartisan agreement in academic circles on the idea of a basic income. The American Enterprise Institute's Charles Murray has written a book on the subject and liberals have long dreamed of a guaranteed basic income. Nevertheless, it will not be coming to the U.S. anytime soon.

**Seaward**

Always trust Teddy.

"The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life."

**Alfndrate**

Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working? I might not mind that, as it would free me up to pay off my student loans quick (Hell I could have my federals paid off in no time!), but I don't see this as a good thing...

**Crazy_Carnifex**

The biggest problem I see right off the bat is how you pay for it.

Raise Taxes=Unhappy Republicans

Cut Services=Unhappy Democrats

If you thought Obamacare was a bleep-show...

**Rotary**

I guess it would hurt when a bunch of americans stop working all together because they would survive on the supplied income instead of trying to work.

On the up side it might lower competition for jobs with less people in the market if that were the case.

Either way i can't even begin to imagine the negative side effects. I wouldn't support it if it came to a vote. It seems way too risky to me. This conversation is probably above my knowledge of economics.

**Platuan4th**

Alfndrate wrote:
Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working?

According to the article, that's the idea. You'd be drawing the government "pay" as well as whatever job you work.

**Firehead158**

...And that would be the death of the United States of America.

**whembly**

Great way to drive up inflation...

**Easy E**

Firehead158 wrote:
...And that would be the death of the United States of America.

Tell me more?

**Frazzled**

Alfndrate wrote:
Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working? I might not mind that, as it would free me up to pay off my student loans quick (Hell I could have my federals paid off in no time!), but I don't see this as a good thing...

Take over Canada. Seize the maple reserves = PROFIT!

He Who Controls the Maple Controls the Galaxy!

**Tibbsy**

Platuan4th wrote:
Alfndrate wrote:
Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working?

According to the article, that's the idea. You'd be drawing the government "pay" as well as whatever job you work.

Wouldn't that encourage employers to pay lower wages? If they know everyone is getting money anyway, they'll likely be more inclined to not give any more than they have to.

I certainly think its an interesting idea - but probably not one that would work.

**fishy bob**

whembly wrote:
Great way to drive up inflation...

This was my first thought. Post-WWI Germany comes to mind.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Tibbsy wrote:
Platuan4th wrote:
Alfndrate wrote:
Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working?

According to the article, that's the idea. You'd be drawing the government "pay" as well as whatever job you work.

Wouldn't that encourage employers to pay lower wages? If they know everyone is getting money anyway, they'll likely be more inclined to not give any more than they have to.

I certainly think its an interesting idea - but probably not one that would work.

I would kinda assume that if you get a job paying more, then certainly on the surface you'd be getting paid less, but I feel that the job would still pay based on it's current pay scale/ at it's demand "value" (so doctors, lawyers and other professionals making 100k+ per year would still be getting that, just minus 11k)

**Alfndrate**

Would the government provide us with W2s so we can take care of taxes at the end of the year?

**Firehead158**

Easy E wrote:
Firehead158 wrote:
...And that would be the death of the United States of America.

Tell me more?

The way the government has been running things, we're poor enough as it is. I see the benefits of it, I really do, however I believe its a horrible idea. We cannot afford to give every single person over the age of 21 a paycheck of $11,000USD for existing. Most of the US is a bunch of oxygen thieves anyway. Why don't they just put forth other programs, like making college tuition free? Education shouldn't be a business. There are TONS of other things they could do to stretch out the average persons income, instead of giving them money. I love money, and I like the concept of getting 11,000 bucks to sit on my arse. However, my drive for personal income is not over ridden by the greater good of furthering my counties existence. Is immigration bad now? Yea, at least down here in the southwest. It wouldn't be long before we have to give this money to illegal immigrants too. How about all those lazy fethers who DO live off of welfare and food-stamps/EBT? They will want those benefits on top of this 11,000 dollar paycheck. Why? Because I have the opportunity to work AND get my 11,000 dollars. Yes, I know that this would probably strike down welfare and EBT cards, however there will be those(politicians) who will push for both. There are hundreds of other ramifications I could think of, but would take hours to type.

**Hulksmash**

Frazzled wrote:
Alfndrate wrote:
Would I get this 11,000 dollar income in addition to what I get for working? I might not mind that, as it would free me up to pay off my student loans quick (Hell I could have my federals paid off in no time!), but I don't see this as a good thing...

Take over Canada. Seize the maple reserves = PROFIT!

He Who Controls the Maple Controls the Galaxy!

Someone has read John Ringo

**BewareOfTom**

I agree with firehead, I mean how nice would it be if college/university was only the cost of living every year? all you have to do is feed and house yourself (or your parents move close

) and you can learn as much as you want.....

oh well, step in the right (general) direction I suppose

**curran12**

Immensely destructive to both the economy and the people as well.

**notprop**

Recruitment for the Armed Services would plummet, immigration would sky rocket.

Hovering up to poor and training them is one of the benefits of that $700BN defence budget.

And once everyone in the US has $11k per month, you know they will just redefine relative poverty again anyway so anyone that doesn't have a car less that 5 years old or a swimming pool is now poor.

Do not fall for it Murica, the socialists are trying to buy your souls.

On the plus side you will be another step closer to living in Mega-City-One. All you need is (a bit more) social collapse, a draconian judiciary and knee pads!

**Dreadclaw69**

And the basic cost of everything rises in tandem with this free money (which is never free), so basic goods and services increase in price.

Was this written by someone who thinks that we need Zimbabwe like inflation during a period of economic weakness?

**notprop**

Didn't Australia recently give every adult $1000 gratis.

How did that work out?

**juraigamer**

notprop wrote:
Didn't Australia recently give every adult $1000 gratis.

How did that work out?

Well, Australia is still around with no problems except wildfires, killer spiders, poisonous frogs, killer birds, sharks, various venomous aquatic life, and various other dangers.

So since America only has a few bears and wolves, it should be fine.

**notprop**

But a 1000 bucks worth of Slurpee's and MaccyD's could be lethal to many over there!

It's all swings and roundabouts this political lark mate, swings and roundabouts.

**easysauce**

this is the worst idea since the combi oral/rectal thermometer

**MrMoustaffa**

Good idea at heart, horrible idea in practice.

Yes, there are good people who this would do some good for, but the vast majority would abuse the hell out of this.

I don't want to have higher taxes so the methhead down the street can buy a plasma TV while his kids live off of potato chips. He already does this with the social security checks anyways.

No system is perfect, but at least food stamps force people to spend the money on food that can help their family. Handing a guy $11,000 a year does nothing to assure that he will spend it on necessities like food, rent, or insurance. I see plenty of welfare abusers living in the south and I know that this problem wouldn't help the situation in any way. I've seen people who live in houses that should have been condemned years ago, yet still somehow have enough money to buy a new Ford F150, mount two massive smokestacks on the back, and "run coal" to blind people on the highway.

However, it would be awesome for a guy like me, trying to get back into college and pay off some old loans. I could easily live off of $11,000 a year if I had to which would free up more time for me to spend with classes or in a service program like AmeriCorps. I wouldn't have to worry about working a couple of dead end jobs to pay the rent and wouldn't have to take out a loan either.

I might be on with it if they just replaced all of the social welfare programs with this as a flat income and gave it out in biweekly payments so people wouldn't blow it all at once. Would probably save a lot of money since you wouldn't need as many alphabet soup organizations to manage the program

**dæl**

This is an old idea that is resurfacing, it was tried in the seventies in Canada, and none of the harmful effects that have been mentioned ITT came to pass. There is another study happening right now in Namibia, which we will see the results of in a few years.

The calls for this will only get louder as the automation of jobs and increased population takes us further from full employment, it is quite possible that 3d printing alone could make millions unemployed, and that is just one technology.

**easysauce**

right, so 300 million people pay themselves 11k a year,

to pay for that 11k a year per person, each person has to pay 11k a year into the system, or there has to be some other way to earn the 11k per person.

not suprisingly,

some people dont see the obvious problem with this.

heck, why not end poverty, AND wealth inequality, and just pay everyone a million dollars a year...

to the poster above, yes canada did try this, and STILL DOES IT...

we still give over 5 billion a year to natives as monthly payments, and I think its actually MORE then 11k a year...

and every single one of the problems people talk about, is happening (except for massive inflation, as its only a small % of the population getting free money, not all of us)

giving away free money, is not actually giving away free money.

It is TAKING money away from one person, and giving it to another.

and while you can most certainly CAN (not should) rob paul to pay peter,

you cannot rob peter to pay peter, and expect peter to actually have more money then he started with...

that is just the most basic of math.

**hotsauceman1**

Why do i think of Syndromes line from the incrdibles "If everyone is a superhero, then No one is" when i read this
If everyone goes up by 11k a year......then that means everyone is still poor Prices of things will drastically inrease, rent would be increased.
There are numerous ways to help the poor, help decrease crime rate, make public schools better,

**dæl**

I couldn't speak for 300 million (Although, this isn't going to happen over there. The US is still in the grips of McCarthyism and socialism is a four letter word to you guys), but for the 60 million in the UK it has been costed that a flat rate of income tax of 35% will pay for the program.

**MrMoustaffa**

easysauce wrote:
right, so 300 million people pay themselves 11k a year,

to pay for that 11k a year per person, each person has to pay 11k a year into the system, or there has to be some other way to earn the 11k per person.

not suprisingly,

some people dont see the obvious problem with this.

heck, why not end poverty, AND wealth inequality, and just pay everyone a million dollars a year...

I guess the idea is that the rich and the corporations' taxes will cover the cost. Because you know, those two groups NEVER weasel out of taxes