What is it a basic income?
If the United States implemented a basic income, we could abolish or drastically mitigate poverty in this country.
The most immediate objections to this are: The financial cost, and the moral objection that we’re handing people money unconditionally (which
to some extent, may encourage laziness).
The cost issue isn’t as bad as it may seem. With this proposal in place would eliminate or drastically scale back government programs aimed at the poor, such as food stamps, social security, unemployment benefits, minimum wage laws, earned income tax credits, and Pell Grants. These would largely be unneccesary with everybody automatically being lifted above the poverty line.
To use an example of how much such a program might cost, let’s look at the federal poverty line for a family of three (two adults, one child): 18,310 . Divide that by three and
you have $6,103 dollars per person per year. With 307 million people in the U.S, that comes to about 1.87 trillion dollars. Sounds like a staggering cost. And it is. But it’s not an impossible cost. It’s only 13% of the nation’s total gross domestic product of 14.4 trillion.
According to this chart from Forbes Magazine ,
the U.S.A tax burden is only 25.5 percent of total GDP. Compare that with
France, which has a burden of 43.7%. Even implementing this plan, and making zero cuts to current government programs, we could implement this and still have a lower tax burden than France!
Now the next major question: Would this program be unsustainable, removing a major incentive to work, with substantial numbers of people choosing to drop out of the work force in preference to holding down a job? I don’t deny there will
be some small number of people who do this,there’s less of a danger of that with the Universal Basic Income than with traditional forms of welfare.
I think the main problem with conditional government benefits is this: An unemployed person will stop getting welfare/unemployment if they actually land a job. This creates a disincentive to find work. It doesn’t even take a particularly lazy person to turn down an offer to turn down an offer for part time work if that job would pay them less than they’re already collecting in benefits.
Under my basic income scheme,a poor unemployed person would always have something to gain by working, because he would also get more money by working than not working. The only incentive that would be removed would be the threat of “work or starve/become homeless”.
Without the need for a minimum wage, even the most unskilled worker could find someone to whom he could sell his labor, making it much easier to find work. And without the “work or starve” paradigm, no employer could abuse his lower paid
employees because the consequences of quitting would never be too dire.
Finally, and this is going to be extremely controversial, I think even the most shiftless and lazy person doesn’t deserve to starve. I’d rather see today’s Winos hanging out in a cheap studio apartment drinking Thunderbird and not bothering others than crowd the streets and bother people. And considering how many communities are literally criminalizing homelessness, it’d probably be cheaper to just cut them a check than to keep repeatedly jailing them for vagrancy and public drunkenness.