View Full Version : Temporary Universal Basic Income?
gimmethesimplelife
4-17-20, 7:03pm
An idea whose time has come or not? Rob
frugal-one
4-17-20, 7:13pm
not
Actually, I change my post. I missed the word temporary. In this environment it is hard not to have help.
ApatheticNoMore
4-17-20, 7:15pm
yes (the increased unemployment benefits if they are continued are in many ways the same thing though and somewhat more targeted with all the upside and downside that come with being so). Or a moratorium on bills is also the same thing. I mean there are ways to slice it, it's too late for furloughs and payments through people's work like other countries have done, might have been best, but I suspect too many have already lost jobs, but yea multiple ways to skin a cat or whatever (apologies to cats), but people need help.
I really liked Andrew Yang when I heard him in Plaistow, NH and I did some reading afterwards on UBI. Pilot programs are promising, but there are a few concerns I have.
If you keep the current US healthcare system one serious illness or accident could bankrupt a person. Could the UBI be garnished for medical bills? If so it would remove help from people who need it most. To me starting reforms with national health care first made more sense.
What safeguards are there that extra cash will not feed addictions and lead to more overdose deaths?
If everyone has more money what is to prevent providers of goods and services from raising their prices? Could this fuel inflation, particularly in areas with tight housing markets?
iris lilies
4-17-20, 7:57pm
Sure, why ever not. Everyone is getting at least one gubmnt check, might as well continue with them.
I mean, why not? Frugal-one, why not?
checks for everyone!
3165
https://imgflip.com/i/3x3lek
ApatheticNoMore
4-17-20, 8:35pm
Well the why is because we have no other means right now to get those who can't work at home and aren't essential back to work right now (why - we don't have testing, we don't' have contract tracing, we don't have enforceable quarantine for those known to be infected,and we don't necessarily have adequate medical equipment either). Anyway noone is going to go to a restaurant or a gym or to buy random stuff they don't need right now even if they were open, except maybe those with suicide ideation. So they can fantasize about a miraculous recovery all they want, but without treatment or a vaccine or the epidemic under control it's not happening.
But yea many other things accomplish basically the same thing: the expanded unemployment for everyone who had an on the books job before (those who are able to work from home with companies able to continue to pay them are no problem for anyone to solve, they are just lucky), things like moratorium on rents and so on accomplish basically the same thing. It's too late for many for furloughs and money paid to workers via government THROUGH their employment with a job to go back to, might be best for restarting the economy DOH, but the chance was blown, the government needed to act weeks ago before many were just straight out laid off (or I think many were straight off laid off anyway - I don't actually have numbers of lay offs versus furloughs)
When I watch the news with cars lined up for hours and miles to get food from a food bank, I tend to think we are in need of some sorts of "food in every pot" programs. If the economy ever does make a full come back from Covid, it is not going to be soon. No matter how many Boeing employees go back to work when work restrictions are relaxed, it's not going to send the same pre-pandemic people back to the airports.
I think part of Yang's reasoning was that AI efficiencies would gradually replace portions of the work force and maximum employment would never be able to use the available work force. In an odd sort of way that is happening. There are a lot of real world transactions that have quickly been replaced with a more virtual world of business.
A question could be who will pay for the programs. Printing new money seems more popular than taxation these days.
Teacher Terry
4-18-20, 3:00am
I don’t see it happening. I don’t see how we can afford it either unless we want to pay 50% in taxes which no one wants to do. What a waste to give money to people that don’t need it like the stimulus did. Of course when you read about all the people with lots of money taking the business stimulus money when they don’t need it. It should have been for businesses that needed it.
iris lilies
4-18-20, 10:11am
I don’t see it happening. I don’t see how we can afford it either unless we want to pay 50% in taxes which no one wants to do. What a waste to give money to people that don’t need it like the stimulus did. Of course when you read about all the people with lots of money taking the business stimulus money when they don’t need it. It should have been for businesses that needed it.
what you mean, “afford it?”
Free money from the gubmnt, isnt that always a good thing? Especially sweet are the checks that essentially pay people not to work. They make more unemployed thsn they do working. We need more of that.
Sounds so simple, doesn’t it? Just give it to “those who need it”. But how would you make that work in practical terms? By employee count? Those in trouble but not already doomed? Distributed by region or your identity groups of choice? A two trillion dollar handout in a short period isn’t the easiest task.
ApatheticNoMore
4-18-20, 10:31am
Sounds so simple, doesn’t it? Just give it to “those who need it”. But how would you make that work in practical terms? By employee count? Those in trouble but not already doomed? Distributed by region or your identity groups of choice? A two trillion dollar handout in a short period isn’t the easiest task.
the closest one can say is the unemployed and it will catch many of the people in trouble so just helping the unemployed does a lot to help, but even that is approaching Great Depression levels. Meanwhile what about the self-employed who have no business now, do they qualify for that? What about things like Uber drivers (maybe considered employees in California now but don't think they generally are), some might be able to do door-dash I guess. What about those who were unemployed for over 6 months prior to when covid hit and thus under the usual rules unless they were changed can't qualify for unemployment and yet now face a horrible job market. What about those who live outside the system? But they shouldn't live outside it. Oh very well, I'm not thinking of say armed robbers so much (although we are releasing prison populations now too, and where they go who knows), but people do things like collecting recycling to survive, but are any recycling places open, already severely limited before all this? What about people who quit their work, not normally eligible for unemployment, what if they quit because their work exposes them to high risk and they have severe health risk factors already? So UBI catches too many but unemployment too few.
iris lilies
4-18-20, 10:48am
Sounds so simple, doesn’t it? Just give it to “those who need it”. But how would you make that work in practical terms? By employee count? Those in trouble but not already doomed? Distributed by region or your identity groups of choice? A two trillion dollar handout in a short period isn’t the easiest task.
In our new economy your dad logic is not welcome!
3166
Well since the happiest people about this out here in my world are Republicans I'm saying it:
Federal income support should NOT go to Republicans. Afterall, the premise is Democratic Socialism. Republicans do not believe in it therefore shall not benefit from it!:welcome:
Republicans already got their trillions in that notorious tax cut.
iris lily
4-18-20, 11:06am
Well since the happiest people about this out here in my world are Republicans I'm saying it:
Federal income support should NOT go to Republicans. Afterall, the premise is Democratic Socialism. Republicans do not believe in it therefore shall not benefit from it!:welcome:
Yes! Spoils go to random, partisan groups. Gubmnt at its finest.
Republicans already got their trillions in that notorious tax cut.
Yes they did. And the rich get richer>:( But a $15 minimum wage is criminal:(
I think there are two complementary and equally inane arguments out there.
One is saying that people who think the government isn’t taxing us enough should assuage their guilt by mailing the Treasury a check.
The other is that those objecting to a program they (or perhaps in this case their children and grandchildren) are being made to pay for should by rights refuse any benefits.
Teacher Terry
4-18-20, 12:21pm
IL, sarcastic again.
IL, sarcastic again.And yet if she had thrown 'Republican' into the sentence, it would be viewed as a profound truth. Weird huh?
ToomuchStuff
4-19-20, 12:28am
An idea whose time has come or not? Rob
Not.
What safeguards are there that extra cash will not feed addictions and lead to more overdose deaths?
I can't think of any, as once you give someone money, it is theirs to do with as they please. There are those that don't have bank accounts, etc., so once they get it cashed, how would you control it?
I expect that some would be "stupid" with it. (drugs, guns, whatever you view as objectionable) Others, like a guy I know who has been getting social security (from his father), since he was 19 (in his forties now), would be stashing it (retirement/savings, etc). And in other area's, I am sure there would be some inflation.
Sure, why ever not. Everyone is getting at least one gubmnt check, might as well continue with them.
I mean, why not? Frugal-one, why not?
checks for everyone!
3165
https://imgflip.com/i/3x3lek
They are? My understanding is over a certain amount, doesn't get a check. I expect Oprah would be among that. I heard on the radio on the way to work, that EPSN was asking their broadcast personalities, to take a 15% paycut to keep people working. A friend that works there, gave up their years salary, to keep others employed.
I have six months of expenses set aside for unemployment, or some situation like this. I was actually looking forward to having time off. Unfortunately, I am "essential" and can't get time off.
Sure, why ever not. Everyone is getting at least one gubmnt check, might as well continue with them.
Nope. Individuals over $75k/year or couples over $150k is where the checks stop. 42.9% of American households made more than $75k in 2018. 15.5% made over $150k.
It's a bit misleading as many households may be a single person and that data is not presented here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/203183/percentage-distribution-of-household-income-in-the-us/
Nope. Individuals over $75k/year or couples over $150k is where the checks stop. 42.9% of American households made more than $75k in 2018. 15.5% made over $150k.
It's a bit misleading as many households may be a single person and that data is not presented here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/203183/percentage-distribution-of-household-income-in-the-us/
Yep, those poor people earning in the triple digits were left out, so one proposal for round 2 is to increase the income to $130,000 for singles, $260,000 for couples, and pay $2K a month for a minimum of 6 months.
Teacher Terry
4-19-20, 1:57pm
Y, that’s disgusting. They don’t need it.
Hey, I want some free money too.
Yep, those poor people earning in the triple digits were left out, so one proposal for round 2 is to increase the income to $130,000 for singles, $260,000 for couples, and pay $2K a month for a minimum of 6 months.
Ridiculous!!!!!
As someone who didn't get a check I agree. If the person is still working they don't need the money. A better plan would be to extend the extra $600/weekly unemployment benefit. That would probably be cheaper (I have no idea how many people in the higher income range are among the recently unemployed but assume that's it's a pretty small percentage) and it would be much better targeted to the people who actually need it.
JP I think you are correct and most people being laid off are middle or lower income. At my company the managers make the call and always keep themselves on. Even one who recently had cancer and is over 60 who I thought would volunteer for the 4 week furlough did not. There is supposed to be a hiring freeze but they are advertising for an assistant manager at another location.
ToomuchStuff
4-20-20, 12:04am
As someone who didn't get a check I agree. If the person is still working they don't need the money.
Didn't get what money exactly? The check that they want you to blow on frivolous stuff, to boost the economy, when stores are closed? (really don't think that was thought out well)
KnownRogue
4-20-20, 8:00am
States already have programs in place for nutritional assistance, rent relief, and utilities. Some states might be overwhelmed, and require federal money, but I would prefer "stimulus" or whatever you want to call it be handled at as local a level as possible.
I'm still working, and doing ok. I wont be getting unemployment, or a stimulus check. Nothing has changed for me.
Except for a growing distrust for the political parties as they stand now. Its hard to adequately describe the unease I feel when I see someone at this point in a global crises point a quivering finger and mewl on about their hatred for -insert politcian or political belief here-.
Anyway, screw'm. I'll just go to work, knowing that because of my political beliefs, I'm never wrong, I'm morally and intellectually superior to everyone who doesnt think as I do, and I can always look forward to coming home and getting into political arguments online, I'm gonna get some real digs in, baby! Awww yeahhh.
Whatever it takes to keep moms from watching their kids starve. I don't care, there has to be a reason we (as a nation) do all the shit we do to stay a first world power. Call it UBI, call it stimulus, call it egregious income redistribution. Dont give it to those who dont need it, do give it to those who do, dont take it if you dont need it. Keep the final decision as to who gets what at as local a level as possible, so those with the authority can easily be held accountable for their mistakes or malfeasance.
And have a good day, its beautiful outside, at least here.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.