Posted on 05/24/2017 8:28:18 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
As the global economy stares down the barrel of rising inequality and increased automation, more countries are toying with the idea of a universal basic income. But a new report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is less than enthusiastic, saying that without significant tax hikes, a basic income would do little to reduce poverty and even exacerbate it in some cases.
That conclusion is very problematic for a welfare reform that advocates bill as a solution to poverty. A small safety net of cash distributed to everyone regardless of income level or employment status, prevents people – but especially the poor – from slipping into destitution.
Finland, for example, is almost five months into a two-year experiment in basic income, and so far many of the recipients are already reporting lower levels of stress. Every month, the country’s social security institution pays out $600 to 2,000 people who are enrolled in unemployment, and that payment will continue until 2019 even if they find jobs. Whether they choose to stay home to care for elderly parents, turn down unappealing jobs, take a low-paying job or start a business, they have some measure of financial stability.
According to the OECD, it is a simple welfare solution that cuts down on bureaucracy. However, in its policy brief published yesterday, it examined the financial feasibility, and the conclusions were not encouraging.
According to the report, if all existing benefits for the working-age population were scrapped and the funds spread equally, the amount would fall far short of eradicating poverty and be less than what some beneficiaries currently receive. On the other hand, a basic income amount set at the poverty line for a single person would be very expensive and require additional taxes.
Looking at simulated scenarios in a few countries, the report concluded that poverty rates would actually rise in the U.K., France and Finland with a basic income and would remain about the same in Italy. However, middle-income households would gain the most, particularly in France.
But basic income advocates disagree on a number of points. For one thing, it’s not actually a basic income if doesn’t lift people above the poverty line. The report also suggests that achieving a basic income amount at that level would require immense increases in personal income tax. However, advocates see many sources of potential financing, such as a carbon tax, tax on automation, closing tax loopholes for corporations and a combination of other tax reforms.
(TWEET-AT-LINK)
Ultimately, supporters say that funding a basic income is fundamentally different from funding other benefits, “because for the vast majority of people it works like a tax rebate,” Karl Widerquist, an economist at Georgetown University-Qatar, wrote in a post for Basic Income News. His calculations, which are currently under peer-review, conclude that the cost of basic income are far more reasonable.
Regardless of concerns posed by the OECD and others, many countries, political parties and even private initiatives are forging ahead in talks and promises of basic income trials. It’s a solution that many at the very least hope will work.
Basic income? Crazy idea.
I can give you 500,000 Dong to live off of per month. Too bad that is only $20.00
They should consult with Venezuela to see how printing money really works out.
They would spend all the money immediately, and the rich would get it back. Money may circulate among the poor and middle class, but the wealthy understand it’s not what you take in, it’s what you keep.
Basic anything will still get you just the basics. If you are able to work for the basics and don’t, then you should just die off.
Can’t handle the truth? TFB.
Well duh!
Basic income means that that is the new zero point
Socialists are parasites convincing others that being parasites is a virtue and an inalienable right.
A guaranteed basic income would immediately set off price rises in everything that would require, of course, an increase in the basic income allowance. It would be a self fulfilling prophecy in that it would reduce people’s desire to work and would feed a vast trade in illicit goods. It would ghettoize the whole population.
Rught now - $22.32.
Rught now - $22.32.
Yup. As they say, "Poor people have poor ways."
Why can’t the supposed “intellectuals” figure out that if basement-level incomes go up, so will prices? Probably because they have never actually worked for a living and seen the theft committed by the government, as evidenced in their pay stub.
These advocates should find some “basic work” anyone can do and give them a “basic job” to get their “basic income”. Or let them get a “basic education” or “basic vocational training” to receive their “basic income”.
Ideally we’d get something productive from the basic income. But simply having the recipients show up to work or school every day and do SOMETHING builds habits that will help them rise about basic income.
I’d bet there are some entrepreneurs who can figure this out if 1) they are allowed to make money and 2) the mountain of government regulations are taken out of the way. I know they won’t be allowed to compete with unions and other businesses, but if the government is paying the “basic income” someone can figure out how to make use of the people receiving it while developing skills and work ethic in those people.
I’m against “basic income”, but if the goal of these advocates is anything other than building a permanent “slacker class” in society, there are discussions I’m happy to have with them about how the government can spend my tax dollars to pay those in poverty.
LOL! Might as well be like the guy who asked how much a job paid and was told he’d be paid what he was worth - he said he couldn’t live off that.....
Does basic income mean they don’t get food stamps, welfare, section 8, etc?”
My first question would be, how much money are they making to be advocates? And of course, that includes in-kind payments, like air fare, meals, and hotels.
Any answer except “zero” should end the discussion. Why talk to pimps?
Inflation would pretty much take care of that. Also poor people tend not to be very wise with their money. That’s why they’re poor.
It is so very simple.
If a man will not work, he may not eat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.