UBI discussion

[danstanford]

As suggested by Mike I dropped out of response to the other thread that had some UBI elements as thread drift.

To frame the situation as I see it having watched this policy item evolve over the last half decade, I have some people in my family that would work and enjoy prosperity even if UBI were in place. There are certainly people in my family who would stay at home if there were a way to survive without having to take the various risks existing in the work world. The essential problem I have is that the number of those who would stay home would grow and the resultant cost would drown the rest of us in taxes.

To prompt discussion from the passionate advocates I submit this:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/tops...xuY?li=AAggFp5

[PatB]

Whilst there may well be a percentage of the population who would take the money and stay home, I'd suggest that the number would be surprisingly small. Look at how many people have complained of the boredom of Covid lockdowns. Even those who *do* adopt a life of leisure will still spend their UBI, keeping the money flowing through the economy and providing businesses with turnover/cash flow, so the outlay is still not "lost".

On the other hand, I suspect there would be a significant number of people who would use their greater financial security to take up educational opportunities, or start their own businesses, for example. Things which are hard to do when avoiding penury absorbs the majority of their time at present. Financial security is also helpful in even a professional career. A modest, guaranteed income can be the difference between able to wait for the ideal job, and being forced to take the first offer because not doing so will result in starvation/homelessness.

People who are not in fear of being suddenly plunged into destitution are more likely to spend more freely, again keeping the money going round to the benefit of the economy as a whole.

People who are not in grinding poverty are healthier and so cost health budgets less.

Etc etc.

I'm not a passionate advocate for UBI. I don't know enough about any serious modelling, by people with actual expertise and data, that has taken place. I do, however, recognise that there are potential substantial upsides that offset (maybe completely, maybe not) the costs.

[danstanford]

I have been diligently looking for studies showing good results from UBI tests/studies without much in the way of results that will help me to understand the implications of it. The linked article has attempted to round up all the programs running with some results attached. Interesting reading but still little in the way of telling us what the fiscal impact would be in our world.

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...income-ubi-map

[GordMay]

UBI in Marica, Brazil

In Brazil, a small seaside town’s efforts to bolster its social safety net are making it a standout success story, during the coronavirus pandemic that is currently raging through the country.
Located just 60km from Rio de Janeiro, Marica has modelled itself into a very different city, paying residents a universal basic income [‘mumbuca’], using its own digital currency, and procuring its own vaccines.

Before the pandemic, almost a fourth of Marica’s people were receiving a universal basic income of 130 mumbucas ($22) every month, , distributed to those who earn less than $500 per month.
That amount almost tripled, when the economy was hit by the coronavirus.

Brazil’s official currency is the real, and since mumbucas aren’t accepted anywhere outside of Marica, the 42,000 beneficiaries are forced to spend their virtual currency in their hometown, fuelling local commerce.

More ➥ https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/20...different-path

[Joh.Ghurt]

Is that just a new name for food-stamps?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Joh.Ghurt

Is that just a new name for food-stamps?

Not quite; but somewhat similar concepts.
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet.”

[danstanford]

Yes, quite different from what I have had as a concept for UBI. The other mitigating factor is the fact that this is distribution of a new revenue source rather than borrowing or tax revenues.

[Joh.Ghurt]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Not quite; but somewhat similar concepts.

So everyone gets those mumbucas and you can spend it in town to either buy stuff or pay your taxes? I guess, as long as the town keeps the volume of those spent in shops below what they get via VAT, it'll be not much of a hassle.

For the guys with an income, use them as tax credit, it makes no difference.

For the shops this could get interesting because they can start do individual pricing based on the currency used and gauge the welfare crowd. For example you can buy the 4-pack of toilet-paper for welfare money, but not the 20-roll-value-pack. As you guess, more markup on smaller units. (that's why in poorer districts they sell smaller packs of detergent etc.) This idea has definitely potential for exploitation.

[Mike OReilly]

Ah, fun discussion Dan. I missed your initial post. As you probably know from previous posts, I'm a fan of UBI. In part this is because it is a more efficient way of distributing social welfare. But I also think it is an inevitable necessity that our societies must get our heads around.

A "job" has two functions in our societies. The first is to do (hopefully) useful and productive tasks. The second is as a means of distributing wealth and resources. These two functions are intertwined in our societies, but they need not be.

We are rapidly moving into an economy without jobs. Robotics and offshoring has driven this development for the last 40 years. Now AI is eating into the so-called white-collar jobs. We're not far from being able to replace many professional tasks with HAL. And we've barely begun this revolution. So we must find a better way to distribute the wealth and resources.

There have been a number of experiments and trials on various forms of UBI. I've read some of the research, but certainly not all. Here's a few sites I've found with summary assessments:

https://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/un...rical-studies/

https://www.procon.org/headlines/uni...pros-and-cons/

https://www.thebalance.com/universal...income-4160668

Here's one summary paper written by someone who claims to be writing a book on the topic:

https://basicincome.org/news/2017/12...mmary-results/

Actually, this site seems to be a source for a lot of research and information on the topic. I haven't delved into the library yet, but it's here: https://basicincome.org/research/ .

From the summary documents I've read, the key findings I recall are:

#1. UBI does tend to reduce the number of hours people choose to work, but only by a small amount.

#2. There are significant non-financial benefits in quality of life, and general health-status measures.

#3. It is far less costly to administer than the current complex forms of social welfare.

For those that worry UBI will lead to mass laziness, consider that we have a constant and long-running experiment in the form of this thing called retirement. Consider the behaviour of most people you know who are retired Are they sitting around doing nothing? Or are they busy?

Some fall into the former category. Most into the latter. Most people continue to do "work." The difference lies in the freedom retired people have to choose what work they want to do.

[Joh.Ghurt]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

#1. UBI does tend to reduce the number of hours people choose to work, but only by a small amount.

People with less or no work tend to do very stupid things. This alone is a strong argument against it.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

#2. There are significant non-financial benefits in quality of life, and general health-status measures.

This argument is pure fantasy ignoring everything known about human nature. The biggest quality of life comes from feeling superior to your neighbour, at the moment most easily achieved by having more than him

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

#3. It is far less costly to administer than the current complex forms of social welfare.

I wonder why all those proponents of these kind of systems are so naïve and clueless. Sure, at first glance it might look as it it reduces some administration, but only for the really short moment until people figure out to gamble and exploit the system. This happened with every single welfare-system known to man, from the beggars in Bagdat at the times of Harun-Al-Rashid to Harz iV in Germany.

UBI will achieve nothing - zilch - nada except to create yet another bloated administration. Nothing good will come out if once people learn how to get most out of it.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

For those that worry UBI will lead to mass laziness, consider that we have a constant and long-running experiment in the form of this thing called retirement.

But most people at retirement age are already broken and worn out by life in body and spirit. Add to that in some countries the medical cost to keep yourself functioning to reduce the remaining years further. And the system works so great, that many western countries are increasing the retirement age so that people pay more, get less and for less time.

[TrentePieds]

Hallo, hallo, hallo...!

Would it not be useful if Mr. Ghurt would define "stupid thing" if he wishes to level such an accusation against those of us who do "less or no work"? And define "work" while he's about it :-)?

It would probably also be useful if he, presumably being fluent in German and therefore being able to cope with the source documentation, were to provide us with a succinct explanation in English of whereof the sundry "Hartz" schemes consisted, and in what manner the contraction at that time of Germany's social services is related to the rise in unemployment that was characteristic of it.

Is there some relationship either in terms of political philosophy or in terms of international finance between the shibboleths bandied about on this continent at the time and those bandied about in Germany?

In brief - tell us whose Kool-Aid we're s'posed to be drinking :-)

TrentePieds