SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The idea of giving people free money is so radical, even some recipients think it's too good to be true.
Later this year, roughly 6,000 people in Kenya will receive regular monthly payments of about a dollar a day, no strings attached, as part of a policy experiment commonly known as basic income.
People will get to use the money for whatever they want: food, clothing, shelter, gambling, alcohol — anything — all in an effort to reduce poverty.
...
But instead of accepting the cash transfers with open arms, many Kenyans have recently been saying "No, thank you." It's a legitimate concern: As GiveDirectly moves into its larger basic income experiment, the last thing it wants is for people to turn down the money.
Basic Income is a concept often mentioned on SN, and this is an experiment to do exactly that. Many potential recipients of the basic income are skeptical about the goals of the experiment, though, and rumors have arisen that it's tied to a cult or devil worship.
Opponents of such wealth transfers argue they lead to indolence, while another school of thought believes they would reduce poverty and directly produce economic stimulus because the poor would immediately spend the money.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AndyTheAbsurd on Monday September 12 2016, @10:41AM
I think you're making a basic mistake about human nature - which is the assumption that a large percentage of the population will simply realize "hey, free money!", quit their jobs (if they have them), and spend the rest of their lives simply mooching off the government and never making enough money to pay taxes; because being lazy is easier than working. However, the fact is that basic income is designed to be subsistence income - enough that recipients will have a roof over their heads and enough to eat, but not much beyond that. And it turns out that sitting around all day with nothing to do is pretty boring (ever tried it? I have - the first couple of weeks are great, but after that, well, there's only so many A-Team reruns you can watch before you want to do something), so most of the people receiving it are likely to spend their trying to figure out a way to earn better money - learning a trade or studying science or figuring out how to set up their own small business. And failing at any of those things is no longer an issue, because they can always fall back on basic income.
Sure, some percentage actually will spend their lives mooching off the government. That's actually acceptable under basic income; one of the arguments for basic income is that the overhead of deciding who gets welfare is higher than the cost of just giving everyone something (note that I'm not arguing if that's true or not - just saying its one argument for it). Another small percentage will active work to scam the system to increase their "basic income"; I think that those people will need to be found and punished.
Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
(Score: 2) by BK on Wednesday September 14 2016, @04:48PM
Actually, I don't make that mistake. Though A-Team reruns never get old. I do love it when a plan comes together.
The question is how to pay it. The idea is that you give to absolutely everyone. How do you get that much more than you already get in taxes? If so, how do you avoid losing a race to the bottom? Do you just print the money and abandon taxes?
...but you HAVE heard of me.