Slashdot Mirror
A New Report Finds No Evidence That People Will Work Less Under a Universal Basic Income (theoutline.com)
Economists Djavad Salehi-Isfahani and Mohammad H. Mostafavi-Dehzooeifrom for the Economic Research Forum have released a new report on the results of a basic income scheme launched in Iran in 2011. "In 2011, in response to heavy cuts to oil and gas subsidies, Iran implemented a program that guaranteed citizens cash payments of 29 percent of the nation's median income, which amounts to about $1.50 every day (about $16,000 per year in the U.S.)," reports The Outline. Here are the key findings: The report found no evidence for the idea that people will work less under a universal income, and found that in some cases, like in the service industry, people worked more, expanding their businesses or pursuing more satisfying lines of work. The researchers did find that young people -- specifically people in their twenties -- worked less, but noted that Iran never had a high level of employment among young people, and that they were likely enrolling in school with the added income. The evidence presented in the paper is compelling, but the anecdotal belief that handing people money will make them lazy is hard to shake. "The findings in this paper do not settle this question," the report's authors point out. "What we have accomplished is at the very least to shift the burden of proof on this issue to those who claim cash transfer [sic] make poor people lazy, and to show the need for better data and more research."
Where the money would come from. Google says there are 243,000,000 working age people in the US. Multiplied by $16,000 that is
$3888000000000
lol
does it finally explain how to fund it? Math on Basic Income doesn't add up. Lets say, for example, that a nationwide basic income were established whereby all citizens received $12k per year. That is just $1k per month, not a livable income in most parts of the country by any means. Would it shock you to discover that would take more than the entire federal income tax revenue per year? On average citizens pay ~$11k/year in income tax.
... either we have to cut pretty much the entire federal budget to fund Basic Income, or we have to increase taxes. Lets say your average Joe who pays the average $11k/yr is increased to pay $22k/yr in taxes ... but they get back $12k/yr in Basic Income ... so they are only out ~$10k. Now, look at the rich ... those who won't miss that extra $11k/yr in taxes ... they are pretty much unaffected. And flip that around to the poor who pay pretty much no income tax, they still pay pretty much nothing, so they are clearly the benefactors as they get an extra $12k/yr.
So
Basic Income is essentially nothing more than another welfare paid for by the middle class. Lets call it what it is instead of sugar coating it to make it look like magic money is going to make everybody's life better.
Rich are fine and the middle class gets their standard of living dragged far closer to those on UBI. It is a fact that the rich can not pay the bills, they are too large. The middle class will be the ones who pay for this.
I'm not pissed about it. Only wankers get pissed about helping out the needy. It's an investment in the future of this country, and it benefits everyone. Less problems, less crime, less strain on medical services, more productivity. Yeah, maybe you can't afford that new big screen TV because of it. Boohoo.
Socialism has nothing to do with Venezuela and you damned well know it. Maduro is NOT a socialist. He's a corrupt dictator who is tearing down the socialist constructs of that country. In other words, as usual, it is another case of conservative authoritarians who are fleecing the country. Reason: CORRUPTION! Human Nature!
The drastic reduction in desperate workers gives employers less leverage.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I think you're thinking of welfare. You still get your full UBI regardless of how much money you make, dramatically increasing the incentives to work.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
*Whoosh*
They're not talking about "incentives from employers". They're talking about the personal incentive ("incentive (n): something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.") to work. Aka, under most welfare systems, there's a "welfare cliff" where if a person works more, their income actually drops as they lose their benefits - and thus there's a disincentive to work past that cliff. Under UBI, there is no such cliff - the more you work, the more you earn.
It's a serious issue. A lot of people who are on benefits for various physical or mental disabilities have "marginal" ability to work. Many want to work, but are afraid that if they take on a job, lose their benefits, and then it ultimately turns out that their condition prevents them from fulfilling the job requirements (a very real risk), that they'll be screwed. It keeps a lot of people who might actually be able to work out of the job marketplace for no good reason.
We gotta go to a crappy town where I'm a hero.