[Cincinatus' Wife]

This will make your hair curl.

[C210N]

We already have this. It is a combination of Earned Income Credit and about 140 welfare programs. Working the “system” one can take in $52,000 here in MA. Your state may vary.

[Bullish]

We may just as well all become drug addicts with govt as our pusher.

This idea, of course is ridiculous.

[Mrs. P]

Ever since I was a little girl, I have wanted curly hair. Never dreamed it would be this awful.

[exDemMom]

Just... wow. Are people really that stupid?

First of all, money has no intrinsic value. Its worth is derived as a consequence of the fact that we use it to barter indirectly for goods and services, because indirect barter is a lot more efficient than direct barter.

Money handed to people with no strings attached is worth exactly as much as the effort they put into earning that money. In other words, it’s worthless.

[Gaffer]

“Share in Prosperity”.........just another name for thievery

[raybbr]

It's a family thing:

80-Year-Old North Carolina Educator: Why I Got Arrested Protesting Right-Wing Agenda for Schools

Barbara Parramore with her daughter, AlterNet Senior Editor Lynn Stuart Parramore.

[muir_redwoods]

So everybody, the wino with the cardboard sign asking for donation up to Bill Gates gets a check for thirty grand a year regardless of any othe source of income. Who’s paying it? Where’s it coming from? Are these people so delusional as to believe we can just print it? If the government can do that, stop collecting taxes and just print what you need.

[abb]

Something for Nothing - the oldest scam since the Dawn of Mankind.

[stockpirate]

“A government powerful enough to give you everything you want is powerful enough to take away everything you have”

[Sooth2222]

The American media is all over it: The New York Times’ Annie Lowrey considered basic income as an answer to an economy that leaves too many people behind, while Matt Bruenig and Elizabeth Stoker of theAtlantic wrote about it as a way to reduce poverty.

The kind of poverty we have in the United States in 2014 isn't the kind of poverty that any amount of money can fix.

[Cowboy Bob]

But who will work to generate the tax money to pay for those who are content to live off the “basis income?” Or, will the government just print the money to pass out?

[Yo-Yo]

Panem et Circenses. (Latin for Bread and Circuses.)

[Junk Silver]

Widespread public support for this sort of economic magical-thinking is the inevitable result of letting the Left take control of the education of our children.

[Sirius Lee]

Nothing will get done because nobody will work.

[edpc]

What if you could receive a guaranteed basic yearly income with no strings attached?

Impossible. The money has to come from somewhere. "Strings" and consequences will always apply.

[RFEngineer]

Ok, let’s try to find something positive.

If we did this, but also got rid of all facets of government that provide “free stuff” - then slowly reduced the payout of the “basic income” over time.....

I know, it would never happen....

[Falcon4.0]

A free paycheck for Everybody.
So what is the incentive for people to stand on waste removal trucks every day, week after week in the freezing cold of winter and the stifling heat of summer to collect the trash that we all generate.
Or to work in a smelly waste treatment facility on a daily bases to keep every ones toilet flushing.

[Jim Noble]

“5 reasons to consider a no-strings-attached, basic income for all Americans”

1) It will create a one-party state
2) It will increase crime
3) It will increase bastardy
4) It will increase poverty
5) It will ensure the final victory of communism

Well, there’s five right there! Didn’t take long, either.

[DemforBush]

Argh! I’m not sure what about the proposal bothers me the most: the naively arrogant notion that there is a simple solution to complex problems or the complete lack of understanding of economic reality involved in this woman’s views.

Such a proposal is wrong, economically and, IMHO, morally. It is wrong for the following reasons:

-Somebody’s got to pay for that “basic income”, and it won’t be the people getting the money.

-There is always a “creep factor” in any government spending program. Over time, taxpayers will be expected to pony up more and more for less and less results.

-Sometimes, poverty is the result of poor decisions. If people choose not to save or to spend their money on frivolous things rather than invest in their future, what makes anyone think that handing out “free” money is going to do anything but reinforce that behavior?

-In fact, you might see an INCREASE in poverty in certain welfare cases. The author suggests replacing existing systems with this program. EBT, WIC and the like have restrictions in them to try to ensure the money and goods are spent on what it is intended for. We have also seen a lot of fraud and abuse in that area. Giving strings-free cash might work where everyone makes rational economic decisions, but in reality we’re likely to see a lot of this money blown in short order.

-Despite what the author argues, it will create a disincentive for workers. Not in working at all, perhaps, but in ambition. If I can work as a fast food worker, and, with my “basic income money” earn as much as someone who has learned a trade or gotten an education, why should I push myself to go further? Especially if that free money gets cut off at some income level?

-What we NEED is a re-evaluation of our trade policies, the Obama administration’s economic policies, and so on. The best way to address income equality is with real economic and job growth.

[facedown]

This is the beginnings of the Morlocks and the Eloi.