If America (USA) adopted the Universal Basic Income, would it make America great again?

[mad_scientist]

What does everyone here think?

Would it stifle or increase innovation?

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, mad_scientist said:

What does everyone here think?

 

I think it stands more chance than the current wall building drawbridge pulling attitude.

8 minutes ago, mad_scientist said:

Would it stifle or increase innovation?

If you include access to a good standard of education, then it can only increase innovation, along with a more contented and, therefore, stronger society. 

[iNow]

Most arguments against UBI strike me as ideological. These programs seem to help quite a bit, are far more efficient, and have tangential benefits like freeing financially dependent women from abusive spouses, letting people change jobs to things they’re more passionate about, start new businesses with less fear of failing and becoming destitute, lowers crime and drug abuse, protects against job loss from automation and can drastically change people’s lives for the better. Alaska already did it, as have other countries. Arguments against? Government is always bad and people will mooch. Benefits far outweigh the costs, IMO. 

[Raider5678]

33 minutes ago, iNow said:

Most arguments against UBI strike me as ideological. These programs seem to help quite a bit, are far more efficient, and have tangential benefits like freeing financially dependent women from abusive spouses, letting people change jobs to things they’re more passionate about, start new businesses with less fear of failing and becoming destitute, lowers crime and drug abuse, protects against job loss from automation and can drastically change people’s lives for the better. Alaska already did it, as have other countries. Arguments against? Government is always bad and people will mooch. Benefits far outweigh the costs, IMO. 

Actually, arguments against is that we don't have enough money to do it for a long period of time. Over the course of decades. Not that government is always bad.

 

 

Also, this isn't my argument, but trust me. I was raised in a nearly 100% republican valley.  This is their opinion.

 

[scherado]

5 hours ago, mad_scientist said:

What does everyone here think?

Would it stifle or increase innovation?

I needed to search for that term, to answer my questions about the concept. From money.cnn.com

It's a concept that's getting a lot of attention, especially in Silicon Valley. 
A country that has universal basic income guarantees every person a set minimum 
income regardless of criteria -- age, wealth, job status, hometown, family size, etc.

That means everyone gets a paycheck, whether they have a job or not.

However, the countries actually experimenting with the concept, Canada and Finland, 
aren't embracing the universal nature of it. So far, they're only giving guaranteed 
income to residents who were were either recently on unemployment benefits or are 
low income.

Do you, mad_scientist, mean the pure version that Canada and Finland have NOT adopted? Or does your question hold for the semi-universal version?

I await the usual contempt and condemnation for making sense. <*ducks*>

Edited September 30, 2017 by scherado

[tuco]

I think it would be the most grandiose experiment since Germany decided to ditch nuclear power

On more serious note, I think some sort of the basic income concept is inevitable as technology progresses. For example here: The robot that takes your job should pay taxes, says Bill Gates - https://qz.com/911968/bill-gates-the-robot-that-takes-your-job-should-pay-taxes/

[beecee]

The basic wage where I come from, is basic minimum any person must be paid for a job, to stop unscrupulous employers from taking advantage of someone. This is around $690 for a 38hrs week. If a person is hired as a casual, there is a loading on top of that. The unemployment benefit is around $450/weekly but recent programs such as working for the dole for young people who have been out of work for an extended period, plus other initiatives such as stringent requirements to actively look for a job, and even more recent times, certain individuals are payed by coupon, where they are only allowed to by essentials such as food, rent etc, so as to avoid any waste on drugs and alcohol.

We also have a universal health care system paid for by a 1.5% levy or 2% levy for high income earners. Retired folk are automatically covered of course and receive a pension amounting to around $850/fortnightly but also assets tested. The family home and car is exempt from such assets testing.

[iNow]

6 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Actually, arguments against is that we don't have enough money to do it for a long period of time.

A common response from folks who mistakenly look at this expenditure as pure cost as opposed to an investment with future returns. There is ROI here, and AFAIK it’s actually cheaper than our current hodgepodge of adhoc social safety net programs where those most in need trend frequently to fall through the cracks. 

That said, I definitely appreciate you giving a more accurate rendering of the opposing view. Thank you!

[mad_scientist]

9 hours ago, scherado said:

I needed to search for that term, to answer my questions about the concept. From money.cnn.com

It's a concept that's getting a lot of attention, especially in Silicon Valley. 
A country that has universal basic income guarantees every person a set minimum 
income regardless of criteria -- age, wealth, job status, hometown, family size, etc.

That means everyone gets a paycheck, whether they have a job or not.

However, the countries actually experimenting with the concept, Canada and Finland, 
aren't embracing the universal nature of it. So far, they're only giving guaranteed 
income to residents who were were either recently on unemployment benefits or are 
low income.

Do you, mad_scientist, mean the pure version that Canada and Finland have NOT adopted? Or does your question hold for the semi-universal version?

I await the usual contempt and condemnation for making sense. <*ducks*>

I meant the full version based on the studies already done of any partial implementation so far of the ubi.

Edited October 1, 2017 by mad_scientist

[scherado]

3 hours ago, mad_scientist said:

I meant the full version based on the studies already done of any partial implementation so far of the ubi.

Thanks.

My answer is no to the question posed in the title of this thread.

[DrKrettin]

I suppose the question in the thread title begs another question, namely: what constitutes "great"?