Should everyone have a guaranteed income, whether they work or not?
Could universal basic income provide a solution to poverty and other challenges that come from economic inequality?
26-30, F
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
tynamite · 31-35, M
The government doesn't have enough money to provide everyone a basic income.
SW-User
@tynamite: That's only according to that one model. That's the thing about economics once you actually get to the numbers, there are limitless models you can create when trying to decide policy. It's why no two economists can ever agree on exactly the same things.
When it comes to basic income, you'll have many, many poor people that would now be able to spend money that they otherwise could never have. That money creates demand, which gets invested into the economy, creates jobs, promotes growth, and leads to a healthy economy.
Rich people can only buy so many pairs of pants or have so many meals at a restaurant. When you spread that money out among a much larger group of people, you create a bevy of positive economic activity just by virtue of an order of magnitude
When it comes to basic income, you'll have many, many poor people that would now be able to spend money that they otherwise could never have. That money creates demand, which gets invested into the economy, creates jobs, promotes growth, and leads to a healthy economy.
Rich people can only buy so many pairs of pants or have so many meals at a restaurant. When you spread that money out among a much larger group of people, you create a bevy of positive economic activity just by virtue of an order of magnitude
tynamite · 31-35, M
@HalfCactus:
No. The government doesn't have the money to give everyone a basic income. This is a fact. The money to provide basic income has to come from somewhere. There's no magic money tree. The government can't magically create all the money it needs, that's why the government collects it through taxes instead.
There is a limit to how much money the government can spend and there is a limit on how much the government can borrow.
This will cause inflation so the price of a Big Mac will get more expensive. When prices increase to match the income increase, which it will, the poor will not be able to afford any more things than they already could afford before the inflation happened. Prices and income will increase at the same rate.
Wealth isn't created by giving people free money from the government. Wealth is created through WORK. Giving everyone the same amount of free money every month doesn't help the economy, it just causes inflation. Providing lots of jobs helps the economy.
I'll repeat it again as you evaded my point. The government doesn't have the money to give everyone a basic income. This is a fact.
That's only according to that one model.
No. The government doesn't have the money to give everyone a basic income. This is a fact. The money to provide basic income has to come from somewhere. There's no magic money tree. The government can't magically create all the money it needs, that's why the government collects it through taxes instead.
That's the thing about economics once you actually get to the numbers, there are limitless models you can create when trying to decide policy.
There is a limit to how much money the government can spend and there is a limit on how much the government can borrow.
When it comes to basic income, you'll have many, many poor people that would now be able to spend money that they otherwise could never have. That money creates demand, which gets invested into the economy, creates jobs, promotes growth, and leads to a healthy economy.
This will cause inflation so the price of a Big Mac will get more expensive. When prices increase to match the income increase, which it will, the poor will not be able to afford any more things than they already could afford before the inflation happened. Prices and income will increase at the same rate.
Rich people can only buy so many pairs of pants or have so many meals at a restaurant. When you spread that money out among a much larger group of people, you create a bevy of positive economic activity just by virtue of an order of magnitude
Wealth isn't created by giving people free money from the government. Wealth is created through WORK. Giving everyone the same amount of free money every month doesn't help the economy, it just causes inflation. Providing lots of jobs helps the economy.
I'll repeat it again as you evaded my point. The government doesn't have the money to give everyone a basic income. This is a fact.
SW-User
@tynamite: You are basing that on a very limited set of information. That's what you don't get. An economy under basic income would not be the same as the economy in your little info-graphic. It's not accounting for the a lot of things, namely money multipliers, credit rating boosts, and the increase in tax revenue from more economic activity. It's not like people benefiting from basic income would just stick the money in their underwear drawer. They're going to reinvest it into the economy, and that's what every competent basic income model depends on.
We already have inflation. We've had inflation for decades. That's how all countries are able to promote economic growth. And this is besides the point since the theory is dependent on tax revenues, not money creation.
Wealth created through work is what Karl Marx thought as well, just letting you know. Any serious economist will tell you that capital is far and away more valuable than labor when it comes to wealth creation. That's practically introductory macroeconomics
We already have inflation. We've had inflation for decades. That's how all countries are able to promote economic growth. And this is besides the point since the theory is dependent on tax revenues, not money creation.
Wealth created through work is what Karl Marx thought as well, just letting you know. Any serious economist will tell you that capital is far and away more valuable than labor when it comes to wealth creation. That's practically introductory macroeconomics
tynamite · 31-35, M
@HalfCactus:
Only money gained through work contributes to the economy. Money gained from the government does not contribute to the economy.
The private sector is the creator of wealth and the public sector is the destroyer of wealth.
It's not like people benefiting from basic income would just stick the money in their underwear drawer. They're going to reinvest it into the economy
Only money gained through work contributes to the economy. Money gained from the government does not contribute to the economy.
The private sector is the creator of wealth and the public sector is the destroyer of wealth.
SW-User
@tynamite: Government spending is literally the third component of any GDP equation. You have no clue what you're talking about
tynamite · 31-35, M
@HalfCactus:
The GDP defines how much money the country generates through labour, people working. Government spending is not part of the GDP. People have to work in the private sector to generate the high GDP that countries like Britain have.
For money to contribute to the economy, it has to be worth something. Money that is not backed by anything is bad for the economy.
Under our fiat currency system our money is backed by labour and debt, especially labour from people working. If the government deposited £100 into everyone's bank account, it wouldn't have a positive effect on the economy, but if everyone worked 10 extra hours a week it would have a positive effect on the economy.
If the government created 100% of its money out of thin air, the economy would collapse. There is a very good reason why the government collects its money from taxes which comes from people's labour, rather than simply magically creating the money itself. Money created from labour is much more valuable to the economy than money given to people from the government.
It's you who has no idea what you're talking about. If you ran a country and tried to implement basic income, you would ruin the country.
The GDP defines how much money the country generates through labour, people working. Government spending is not part of the GDP. People have to work in the private sector to generate the high GDP that countries like Britain have.
For money to contribute to the economy, it has to be worth something. Money that is not backed by anything is bad for the economy.
Under our fiat currency system our money is backed by labour and debt, especially labour from people working. If the government deposited £100 into everyone's bank account, it wouldn't have a positive effect on the economy, but if everyone worked 10 extra hours a week it would have a positive effect on the economy.
If the government created 100% of its money out of thin air, the economy would collapse. There is a very good reason why the government collects its money from taxes which comes from people's labour, rather than simply magically creating the money itself. Money created from labour is much more valuable to the economy than money given to people from the government.
It's you who has no idea what you're talking about. If you ran a country and tried to implement basic income, you would ruin the country.
tynamite · 31-35, M
@HalfCactus: You are ignorant and deluded. Do you think the government can afford to pay everyone a basic income? I think not.