In a world with growing uncertainty we see new technologies destroying job markets and the solution (in my opinion) is Universal Basic Income (UBI). The American government and its cradle to grave "social securities" have failed us and by simply dismantling the redundant programs like WIC, SNAP, SSI, etc. we could pay a monthly stipend to American citizens directly, stimulating the global economy. I'm not an advocate of handing money away "willy nilly" but the game has changed and if done properly, this could be the next step for the U.S.
I do believe that recipients should still be required to do something for the stipend such as ongoing continued education, military service and social work, but in general I believe this is one of the best solutions for the future of the U.S.
What do you think?
I disagree people should have to do anything. I think that just distorts economic functioning. Ultimately I think a guaranteed minimum income would best be accomplished if financed voluntarily.
If money grows on trees, won't it's value go down?
If people get money for nothing, won't a large part of the population continue to do nothing?
What happens when you disagree with the administration who is currently giving you the UBI?
If you get what you put your attention on -- what happens when you reward non-production?
I believe production is the basis of morale -- if people don't feel useful, they'll degrade very quickly. Take away a man's right to work, and you break his spirit.
Educating people in things that have value, would yield much better results.
People are only what you allow them to be -- if you assume they're all incapable of producing, they won't disappoint. Get the government out of the way, and let new businesses come to life, and train people in those businesses, and you'll have a happy person, a happy business, and a happy society.
Giving a person some change on the street, encourages them to continue begging. Giving them a job, allows them to provide for themselves, and eventually, to provide for others.
That's my opinion.
I do agree with you to an extent but not fully. So the way to not devalue the currency is to have a sales tax on everything so the money (in theory )will continue to circulate within the realm of consumers. Secondly, this would dramatically reduce the government in general by reducing the sections that would be encompassed by UBI implementation. Third, I think that if you make it mandatory to do the previously suggested (ongoing continued education, military service, etc) people might find something they do like or are good at thus making them once again a productive member of society (in addition to the consumption factor). And finally, a lot of the current homeless have mental disabilities including the impairment of believing that it is completely acceptable to be homeless, and in general I think this will solve this issue in a number of ways. There will be casualties because if you give an addict money, what do they do? Overall I think this will be worth the total gains and could be considered utilitarian.
Governments are slow, ineffective and non-responsive for the most part. You do not vote for most of the government. Governments, as institutions, will continue to expand their size, power and reach. I doubt you'll be able to shrink any government, other than by bypassing them using cryptos.
If you look at Venezuela, they have more than 50% of the country working for the government. A body that doesn't have to make a profit -- they can just print cash -- and they're not doing so well.
As long as money is controlled by a central authority, they'll continue to be able to manipulate and control/destroy economies.
The current state of affairs around the world, the current suffering is not by accident... it's by design. It's a very old trick. Create a problem and then offer a solution.
Government IS the problem. The Central Bankers ARE the problem. UBI would come from them, and therefore, it's naive to think it's intended to fix anything,
You can research Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
You can also research the effects of keeping the Federal Funds Rate at or near zero for as long as we've had it.
Then you can research the impact of all Central Bankers printing cash endlessly to keep up with the US.
And you can research the end of the Petrodollar, and the effects that will have.
Governments did all that. They are not there to help you. They answer to the Big Money who win them elections.
Finally, you may want to research #pizzagate and #pedoring to uncover just how much of our government is involved in molesting little children.
Is that the kind of people you want giving you UBI?
As certain as the Sun rises in the East, there will be people who cannot care for themselves... there are charities, and churches who take care of that, and do a much better job than a cold, black and white, government program with no accountability.
The facade is fixing to fall in the coming months. Over 1,000 sealed indictments have been sent out. You've already seen the sex scandals coming out of Hollywood, and starting to spill over into government... it's going to get messier.
I believe in people, like you and me, not in a faceless "government" who's too distant from the people, from the truth.
Lastly, the moment you turn your "power" to someone else, you lose it. If you say, "I can't fend for myself, and need big government to do it," will relinquish your personal responsibility, and lose your power.
We are plenty capable people. We just need to assume personal responsibility.
I'll have a read of the study you mention :)
Also here is a recent article you might be interested in....
https://futurism.com/experts-universal-basic-income-boost-us-economy-staggering-2-5-trillion/
You understand that by a UBI, they mean money-printing, of course. The Fed has already "boosted" the US economy by a few Trillion... with little to show for it:
These are the people who'll give you UBI. What could they possibly have in mind?
I suggest you look up Austrian economics, because where the Fed doesn't understand inflation or how to fix the economy, in the words of Janet Yellen, Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard give you a play by play, and an analysis of prior attempts by governments to create wealth by printing money.
A basic analogy is: if you and I live in a vacuum and start printing money, it'll have no value. There's nothing to exchange it for. And I can't offer any services, because there's nothing to service. It takes the creation of a product by one of us, which the other can buy. That product is the value (so long as you desire it). You then, must create a product I want, or we can develop "money" to exchange for the goods, instead of barter.
You may also want to read up on Hyperinflation, and what happened in places like Weimar, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Zimbabwe, even Venezuela. UBI will lead down the same path, IMHO. There have been 55 instances of hyperinflation in our history. Why would this time be different?
Yet, we are free men of free will. I have no problem with you wanting UBI or thinking it's a good idea. As a Libertarian, I believe in Live and Let Live. Both philosophies may work simultaneously, and if one fails, we should always be free to change our minds, countries, and economic philosophies.
I feel that automation will completely wreck your vacuum analogy. If AI and automation are the ones producing something that is desired, how much will it cost? What happens when the cycle is complete with solar or fusion power and the labor value approaches zero.
I think the current economic model will have to be radically altered. Especially when space travel is factored in and resources become post scarcity. Furthermore, digital assets are already approaching post scarcity with nearly limitless information, education and entertainment being open source. Even the block chain technology that allowed this platform to arise is open source! I feel Austrian economics was good for a less technologically developed time.
Those are very interesting questions! I have only partially thought about them, but I would guess the laws of exchange would remain the same. When we eventually get to the point where everyone has a food replicator, and a free energy generation device, you'll still need technicians to create and maintain. You'll still need scientists and specialists in many fields to evolve things. AI is grossly overstated. It's just an expert system (IF THEN ELSE), and that's all that it'll ever be. It won't generate new technology or software.
I have no doubts we'll have to evolve a new economic system, however, my only claim here is that UBI won't work, and will just turn us more into SLAVES.
Can you explain what you mean by "approaching post scarcity"?
I don't think you and I will be around for space travel (much to my chagrin) so that's not part of our current equation.
Please don't misconstrue this as a challenge. I've heard people bring up this idea before of free food and energy, but I can't wrap my head around it.
That's a bold statement. What grounds do you have to predict the future of a technology that isn't even mature yet?
I'm a software engineer. I know that electricity only has 2 states. Off and On. And it can't become self-aware and create things for which is wasn't developed to do.
Sure, you can fool people into thinking they're talking to a person instead of a computer for so long (the Turing Test), but code isn't self-aware, and it won't ever be.
It makes for great sci-fi and scary doomsday scenarios like the Matrix, but even that film is a metaphor for the current state of our world. Not for self-aware software that takes over the world.
Not to say the technology isn't useful and amazing. I just want to clarify that it's not going to spring to life and replace human creativity, nor conquer the world.
Here's the Von Mises analyses of UBI: https://mises.org/blog/dangers-universal-basic-income
I don't agree with his analysis. We already have a form of UBI in the form of interest from wealth. Only a certain class of society get access to it yet they don't stop working. Consider a family with 15 million in the bank earning 2% interest, that's 300 thousand a year. Do these people stop working or become lazy?
Furthermore, he assumes that the money must come from a progressive tax rather than a structural fix. What if we turned trickle down economics on its head. Create a minimum entry point into the market via our money expansion. All major currencies are fiat and now hold weight against each other. How about as we expand the money supply we do it from the bottom up.
Also Austrian economics has its faults too. Numerous times in history we have seen runs on the bank with a gold standard. It's not some magic fix. In fact, gold standard economies have been know for depreciation. Why would I want to buy a bunch of bananas on Monday if I can get an entire meal on Friday. With a growing population it is useful to have the monetary supply continuously grow. In addition, there are times extra liquidity can be very useful.
Finally, as we enter a new era of technology we have some serious thinking to do. Consider that the US manufacturing work force has decline yet the output has increased. So we are producing more with less people. ( http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/25/most-americans-unaware-that-as-u-s-manufacturing-jobs-have-disappeared-output-has-grown/ ) Looking at these trends suggests there is more to go around yet 15.1 percent of Americans were officially in poverty in 2010. This is an increase from 12.5 percent in 2007. Only recently have the started to go back down and that's with continuous stimulus.
Redistribution of wealth is needed to address the rapid changes from technology. I do believe OP is correct in that there should be strings attached to UBI: continued education, military service, social work or a free market jobs are a good place to start.
Certainly, I don't think a gold standard would work. Cryptos are the future.
Sure, the rich don't have to work, but they do, but not all of them. You often hear stories about bored rich kids getting into all kinds of trouble.
I don't understand what you mean by creating a minimum entry point.
I believe the system is too far corrupt, so, until it falls, nothing we do will make it better. UBI or otherwise. The tree is rotten and must fall.
I don't think money supply needs to grow constantly. In a true Free Market, the value of money would change to accommodate the need. Especially with cryptos, where you can go to 18 decimals places.
In a true Free Market without government intervention, prices would come down naturally as businesses, in order to compete with each other, would get better and more efficient at producing better/cheaper products. Especially after the initial startup and manufacturing costs are paid for.
US manufacturing has been exported to cheaper labor countries -- the costs of labor in the US are prohibitive and created by government regulation. In a truly free market, the best companies would compete for the best workers, and salaries would reflect that.
Production is rewarded, and lack of production penalized.
Certainly, automation will always be better at the menial tasks. Same thing happened in the Industrial revolution. And many jobs were eliminated, and you needed more education to get anywhere in the world. That's evolution.
I believe you get what you put your attention on, and if you reward people for not producing, you're going to find people stop trying, and the brightest minds will find other countries where their talents are rewarded.
UBI follows the model of Keynes. So far it's been a mess. What are the odds it'll be any different?
There already are examples of government paying for everything... in the US... in Venezuela.
The most successful people find a need and fill it. And that creates wealth for them.
Also the UBI math doesn't make any sense.
The government, through taxes, steals (at gunpoint) from those who produce and gives it to those who do not produce.
They also print money out of thin air and inflate the currency. Current real inflation is closer to 10% per year (and my food budget can attest to that). Another way they steal purchasing power from our dollars.
And now, they will print helicopter money, and give it to "the little people," and that will somehow magically not go like all preceding attempts to print too much money?
History doesn't look well for UBI. Maybe I'm wrong, but I really don't see the math.
Also, interest from an investment isn't UBI. Someone borrowed that money and paid back with interest after investing it. It's only through the "magic" of fractional reserve lending that money gets created out of thin air. Otherwise, it is primarily the products and then the services that have any value.
If you and I were in a vacuum and we printed a million dollars, that money would be worthless. But we could consume and trade food items back and forth, or I could train you how to farm or fish so you could be self-sustaining.
I've spend some time, though not enough, studying the literature. The economic & policy research into UBI is very complicated & sophisticated from what I can see.
Different anarcho-capitalist perspectives (& I subscribe to anarcho-capitalism) give pro- & anti- arguments regarding UBI.
At the moment I prefer to suspend judgment until there are good empirical studies. I've read Y Combinator has already funded some test cases of UBI implementation in various locations around the world.
See, that's part of my problem. If it's that complicated, and complex, then there' a lot of room to screw us over. Just look at the US Code and all the Laws that are written to tell us how to live -- it takes lawyers a lifetime to learn to manipulate. And it's never written in plain English. Always obfuscated. Never meant for you and I.
Congratulations @oregonism! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP