# Guarenteed Income, what would happen? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 29, 2017, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683 "2017-05-29T23:26:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mrdeals](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ea666f/32.png) [@Mrdeals](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mrdeals)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/1 "2017-05-29T23:26:24Z")
I was involved with a Facebook thread debating a government issued guarenteed income ( like SS but for all ages) most people in my age group (18-30) were for it, I just don’t buy that it would really help many people because, some people are just bad with money. What do you think would happen? ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/2 "2017-05-29T23:50:42Z")
“I just don’t buy that **a job and the corresponding income it produces** would really help many people because, some people are just bad with money.” ---
**Author:** ![Mrdeals](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ea666f/32.png) [@Mrdeals](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mrdeals)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/3 "2017-05-29T23:52:30Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > “I just don’t buy that **a job and the corresponding income it produces** would really help many people because, some people are just bad with money.” ??? I don’t understand your point. It doesn’t matter how much money you make, or what job you have, you can still be dead broke. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/4 "2017-05-29T23:58:14Z")
Many people would spend it somewhat more wisely than foolishly. Yeah, some would go to Las Vegas and gamble, or buy a fancier car than they really need, etc. But it would ease the pains of extreme poverty, and there are a hell of a lot of us who are in those throes. It would stimulate the economy, at least a little. And it would help re-focus the economy on the middle class (and the poor) something that has been getting eroded due to income inequality. Wages, in the past forty years, have gone up only 1/4 as much as the cost of housing. That kind of shit needs to be corrected, and if the market won’t do it, regulation must. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/5 "2017-05-30T00:25:18Z")
It all depends on whether the universal basic income (UBI) is being given \*alongside \*of job income, or \*instead \*of job income. If it’s the former; it could be a great thing. It might boost the economy, shift money away from the wealthy, etc. Someone gets a UBI of $20,000 and also works a fast-food job for an income of $23,000, gets a total combined net income of $43,000 annually, great stuff. If it’s the latter, it would be an utter disaster, if the UBI is high enough. Suppose that the UBI is $20,000 a year. Then almost no one in their right mind would want to work a 9-to-5 job in fast food earning $23,000 a year if they knew that by doing so they’d forfeit their UBI. They would be toiling around two thousands hours a year in an unpleasant fast-food job in return for a gain of…a mere $3,000 in net income. ---
**Author:** ![PoppaSan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/poppasan/32/189_2.png) [@PoppaSan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PoppaSan)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/6 "2017-05-30T00:49:01Z")
> [@Mrdeals](#): > > I was involved with a Facebook thread debating a government issued guarenteed income ( like SS but for all ages) most people in my age group (18-30) were for it, I just don’t buy that it would really help many people because, some people are just bad with money. What do you think would happen? I think there would be an instant jump in prices as almost every merchant in the nation assumes there is more money in the hands of people that are not used to having it. Also more money entering the current marketplace. ---
**Author:** ![lisiate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f05b48/32.png) [@lisiate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lisiate)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/7 "2017-05-30T01:14:42Z")
Finland’s doing a [limited UBI trial now](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/03/finland-trials-basic-income-for-unemployed), but only for 2,000 currently unemployed and only for 560 euros a month. Still the results may answer some quesitons. ---
**Author:** ![snoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@snoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snoe)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/8 "2017-05-30T01:50:07Z")
> [@lisiate](#): > > Finland’s doing a [limited UBI trial now](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/03/finland-trials-basic-income-for-unemployed), but only for 2,000 currently unemployed and only for 560 euros a month. Still the results may answer some quesitons. A bigger, longer-term experiment just started in Kenya: [This Kenyan village is a laboratory for the biggest basic income experiment ever - Vox](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/6/14007230/kenya-basic-income-givedirectly-experiment-village) (I think the best answer to the OP is “no one knows.” Experiments like this will start to tell us something.) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/9 "2017-05-30T02:05:23Z")
The basic premise of free-market economics is that however people choose to spend it, it’s _by definition_ wise (or rather, rational), because that’s how they’re choosing it. Of course, one might debate the usefulness of this definition. The effects would of course depend on how large the income is, and how taxes are raised to pay for it. The way I’d like to see it implemented is that the guaranteed income is enough to pay for pretty much all necessities but no luxuries, and everyone would then pay a very high percentage (in the ballpark of 50%) of all other income. That way, you have to work for your luxuries, but that’s all you need work for. Of course, the exact numbers would need to be adjusted, and then continually re-adjusted over the course of several years, to account for the inevitable effects on the market. And to the list of experiments, you can also add [Alaska](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund), though it’s not nearly at subsistence level. ---
**Author:** ![Mangosteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Mangosteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangosteen)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/10 "2017-05-30T04:34:47Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The basic premise of free-market economics is that however people choose to spend it, it’s _by definition_ wise (or rather, rational), because that’s how they’re choosing it. Of course, one might debate the usefulness of this definition. > > The effects would of course depend on how large the income is, and how taxes are raised to pay for it. The way I’d like to see it implemented is that the guaranteed income is enough to pay for pretty much all necessities but no luxuries, and everyone would then pay a very high percentage (in the ballpark of 50%) of all other income. That way, you have to work for your luxuries, but that’s all you need work for. Of course, the exact numbers would need to be adjusted, and then continually re-adjusted over the course of several years, to account for the inevitable effects on the market. > > And to the list of experiments, you can also add [Alaska](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund), though it’s not nearly at subsistence level. The question would then become what is a “necessity” and what is a “luxury” and who is the judge? Is A/C a luxury? \*Billions \* on people across the globe live without it, but have you ever spent a summer in southern Mississippi without it? What about a car? If its a necessity, how often will the government force taxpayers to buy you a new one? Who pays for repairs and maintenance? Who could call a vehicle a luxury if there is no public transportation _near_ your home? How far away is _near_? What about food? Is steak a luxury/ How about milk? What about clothes? Is a second winter coat a luxury? What about housing? Is “Detached single-unit housing” a luxury? And who is making all these decisions? By what authority? Talk about a can of worms! ---
**Author:** ![CoastalMaineiac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@CoastalMaineiac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoastalMaineiac)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/11 "2017-05-30T04:55:33Z")
As much as I would love to be able to take advantage of it (give me enough money, and I’d never work another day in my life, the lazy bastard that I am), I don’t see how society can have its needs met if work ceases to be a requirement to get by. What happens when [70% of our workforce](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/70-u-s-workers-hate-job-poll-article-1.1381297) decides to take UBI and just up and quits? If this happens in turn with the invention of robot slaves, so that the work is still getting done, then I can see it working. But until then, someone’s got to make the doughnuts, so to speak. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/12 "2017-05-30T08:48:17Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > It all depends on whether the universal basic income (UBI) is being given \*alongside \*of job income, or \*instead \*of job income. > > If it’s the former; it could be a great thing. It might boost the economy, shift money away from the wealthy, etc. Someone gets a UBI of $20,000 and also works a fast-food job for an income of $23,000, gets a total combined net income of $43,000 annually, great stuff. You’d see salaries drop by the amount of UBI. That fast food job would pay $3K, not $23K. > [@Chronos](#): > > The basic premise of free-market economics is that however people choose to spend it, it’s _by definition_ wise (or rather, rational), because that’s how they’re choosing it. That, of course is averaging over the whole population. It still leaves room for individuals to be foolish. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/13 "2017-05-30T09:53:00Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > You’d see salaries drop by the amount of UBI. That fast food job would pay $3K, not $23K. Minimum wage laws would still apply. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/14 "2017-05-30T10:06:09Z")
> [@CoastalMaineiac](#): > > If this happens in turn with the invention of robot slaves, so that the work is still getting done, then I can see it working. But until then, someone’s got to make the doughnuts, so to speak. I know some socialists who would see this as “there are some jobs people won’t do unless they’re threatened with starvation, so we need to make sure we keep on threatening them with starvation so those jobs get done.” How would you respond? For that matter, what about the countries where the, say, fast food workers are unionized, and thus have much better wages and benefits than their American counterparts? Does that show that a guaranteed income society could simply pay those positions better without too much hassle? Another thought: a large segment of the population tends to simultaneously look down on people with menial and minimum wage jobs while also demanding the services they provide. Might that be a factor in the above query? Not sure what can be done about it, though. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/15 "2017-05-30T10:42:53Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Minimum wage laws would still apply. Minimum wage laws would be abolished. There’s no need for them if there’s a guaranteed basic income. ---
**Author:** ![Go\_Arachnid\_Laser\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b2d939/32.png) [@Go\_Arachnid\_Laser\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Go_Arachnid_Laser_1)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/16 "2017-05-30T11:56:59Z")
I think that the future looks pretty bleak without something like UBI, honestly. The truth is that if you started a business in the XX century, there was, of course, a chance that it could fail. And then you were left with crippling debt. But still, most new businesses could prosper well enough. Nowadays chances are way harsher- you can open, say, a shoe store, and no matter how hard you work, people will still end up buying their shoes on Amazon, or getting them from a big superstore, and you’re boned. And it’s only going to get more difficult. With UBI you could open your store using the UBI as collateral in a bank loan. No need to risk your parent’s house. And survive the initial difficult years while you build up a customer base. That’s the ideal concept of UBI, not a lot of people watching Netflix all day at home. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/17 "2017-05-30T12:08:17Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Minimum wage laws would be abolished. There’s no need for them if there’s a guaranteed basic income. I think that’s _almost_ true, _if_ the GBI was high enough to actually live on. I personally think it could be _lowered_ but not eliminated, so as to provide a minimum pay in case of pay disputes (i.e. “I don’t have to pay him anything, it was an unpaid internship!” “For selling burgers? Right.”) The thing I wonder about is what would happen to low-income housing prices once landlords know that there will be a lot more money available. Then, suddenly what you thought was a living income would no longer be. Other prices might or might not rise but they wouldn’t make much of a difference compared to housing. This is one place where I think the government could step in, in theory it should be even less of a problem in America where we have cheap land, except for the huge stigma of living in “The Projects”. I think it would be a workable solution as long as the classic mid-century skyscraper projects are avoided. I _don’t_ think that expanding Section 8 housing would be workable since you can’t force people to rent at “below-market” rates. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/18 "2017-05-30T12:27:17Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **Mangosteen** : > > The question would then become what is a “necessity” and what is a “luxury” and who is the judge? The legislators writing the law, of course. Or maybe some commission or government agency they set up, to more easily make the adjustments as necessary. To be clear, I’m not advocating that the legislation read “The amount of UBI shall be equal to the cost of all necessities”; I’m advocating that the folks creating it use that as a guideline, and then set some number. The recipients could still decide precisely how to spend it, including decisions about just what “necessities” they don’t actually need. And yes, cost of living is different in different places. I don’t think this is actually that big of a problem. Why do people currently live in places where the cost of living is high? Mostly because that’s where the jobs are. Make a job less of a necessity, though, and people will be free to move to the places with lower cost of living. > [@](#): > > Quoth **Ludovic** : > > The thing I wonder about is what would happen to low-income housing prices once landlords know that there will be a lot more money available. Then, suddenly what you thought was a living income would no longer be. Other prices might or might not rise but they wouldn’t make much of a difference compared to housing. This is one place where I think the government could step in, in theory it should be even less of a problem in America where we have cheap land, except for the huge stigma of living in “The Projects”. I think it would be a workable solution as long as the classic mid-century skyscraper projects are avoided. I don’t think that expanding Section 8 housing would be workable since you can’t force people to rent at “below-market” rates. I think it’s best to leave the free market in this as much as possible. One solution might be to have a “public option” for basics like housing and food, with the government ensuring that all of the public options add up to an amount less than or equal to the UBI. People could still choose to spend their money elsewhere, but it’d guarantee that the UBI was always livable, and provide a decent default choice for those who aren’t as good at making their own decisions. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/19 "2017-05-30T14:12:09Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > I know some socialists who would see this as “there are some jobs people won’t do unless they’re threatened with starvation, so we need to make sure we keep on threatening them with starvation so those jobs get done.” How would you respond? Assuming that there are such jobs in the US or the West, then if we implement a UBI then no one does those jobs. So then I suppose we automate those jobs (if possible). If automating the jobs costs the same as or more than paying starvation wages, then we bear the increased cost of paying the UBI as well as the cost of the automation, for the same amount of production of goods or services. If automation costs less, then we are going to automate anyway, and then we have to hope the increased costs of UBI makes up the difference. I don’t have any hard figures to hand, but I wonder how many people who are confronted with the “work this job or starve” have the skills to work at some job that is more in demand. If the idea is to train them for other jobs, the famous Seattle Income Maintenance Experiment/Denver Income Maintenance Experiment ([SIME/DIME](https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/overview-final-report-seattle-denver-income-maintenance-experiment)) did not show that training subsidies and counseling increased subsequent earnings. > [@](#): > > The counseling/training subsidy treatment did not have the expected positive effect for most groups. The effects on average annual earnings and hours of work are shown in Table 8. Earnings declined during the experimental period and, quite unexpectedly, the negative results tended to continue into the post-program period as well, though these post-program reductions were not statistically significant. Not all results for all groups are statistically significant, but the negative pattern shows clearly through the estimates — in earnings, hours worked, and wage rates. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683/20 "2017-05-30T14:20:34Z")
If you thought illegal immigration was bad before… [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guarenteed-income-what-would-happen/787683.md?page=2)