SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Thursday June 02 2016, @08:52AM
from the What-would-YOU-do-with-a-basic-income? dept.
from the What-would-YOU-do-with-a-basic-income? dept.
The highly-anticipated experiment with basic income from Silicon Valley finance firm Y Combinator appears to be making good progress. The company has chosen Elizabeth Rhodes as the project's Research Director, opting for the little-known PHD graduate over applications from tenured professors working at Oxford and Harvard universities. Oakland, California is where the basic income research will happen: the community has been chosen for its close proximity to Y Combinator's head office, and the much-reported wealth divide in the locality.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Basic Income Experiment by Y Combinator Draws Nearer
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 27 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits.
-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"
(Score: 5, Informative) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Thursday June 02 2016, @06:20PM
Basic Income differs from welfare in that it is not clawed back if you decide to start working.
That way, there is no perverse disincentive to work.
If you are on welfare working actually costs you money. Beyond the 50-100% claw-back rate, working incurs transportation costs.
Depending on the job, food an laundry cost may go up. If a single parent starts working, child care costs come into play as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2016, @10:39PM
Basic Income differs from welfare in that it is not clawed back if you decide to start working.
Only if you do not understand that money if fungible.
What do I mean by that? Lets say your basic income level is 20k. Hey not bad right?
Well now you are willing to work for less 20k less to be exact. So now you are more competitive right? Well not really. As guess who is paying for that 20k. The employer. Also everyone else is doing the exact same thing.
Now how do you pay for this? Taxes. Taxes on employees (you know the 99%). But I hear you say 'no its the employer that is paying it'. Well not really. They just pay less to make it up. Its easy too 'sorry total costs are a bit up this year and we cant give you a raise'. Boom paid for out of my raise.
Money is fungible and can be used for other things.
You see 1%rs calling for it. Which is odd. Why would they do that? Think about who will control the amount. Suddenly you have the ability to control what people do. You can put strings on the basic income. You can say 'to qualify you need to do XYZ'. That is power. That is the ability to control what people say and do. It is not freedom. It is the same economic slavery. It is only just slightly better than welfare.
This is mostly a 'do nothing' other than who signs your check and puts a small select group of people in charge of your money. Creates a even larger bureaucracy for people to jump thru hoops. Under the guise of looking good.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 03 2016, @01:55AM
Basic Income differs from welfare in that it is not clawed back if you decide to start working.
Only if you do not understand that money if fungible.
What do I mean by that? Lets say your basic income level is 20k. Hey not bad right?
Well now you are willing to work for less 20k less to be exact. So now you are more competitive right? Well not really. As guess who is paying for that 20k. The employer. Also everyone else is doing the exact same thing.
I notice that you agree ("now you are willing to work for less"). Money being fungible doesn't change that there is more incentive to work than under a traditional welfare system which cuts off entitlements when you earn too much.
This is mostly a 'do nothing' other than who signs your check and puts a small select group of people in charge of your money. Creates a even larger bureaucracy for people to jump thru hoops. Under the guise of looking good.
We already had that with the current welfare state. Bleedings hearts gotta bleed. At least a basic income would reduce the opportunities and scope for hoop making.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday June 03 2016, @06:12AM
There are two ways to implement Basic income:
1. Negative tax rate for low income
Cheaper to run, you need to file your taxes to qualify
2. Everybody get as payment
You qualify by being a registered citizen (possibly of a certain age).
Putting strings on Basic Income defeats the whole point. Things like mean testing are expensive to administer, and there will be people that fall through the cracks.