Jump to content


Recommended Posts

With Andrew Yang bringing the idea of UBI (Universal Basic Income) to the forefront in his campaign, and with its appeal to people from a wide variety of political viewpoints, and since I didn't see a thread for this topic (Admins can merge if I missed it), I think it's relevant to start a discussion on UBI since it's one of a few economic ideas of Democrat candidates that doesn't completely suck. So I'd be interested to hear the viewpoints of others on this board.

 

First off, the first time I really heard of Andrew Yang was on Joe Rogan's podcast, and I appreciated how he is able to speak on a variety of topics from an analytical perspective rather than trying to appeal to people emotionally too much. If you haven't watched his interview on Rogan's podcast, I'd definitely suggest viewing it, as well as his interview with Ben Shapiro on his Sunday Special (regardless what you think about Shapiro - it's irrelevant to this). Both those videos are at the bottom of this post.

 

Like he says, UBI (or some form of it) has been advocated by people who represent all political viewpoints, and it's generally a non-partisan issue. I disagree with many of the claims he makes, and I feel that many of the ways he presents the issue of UBI are intellectually dishonest. Here would be a list of pros & cons as I see it:

 

Pros: 

-An extra $1000 a month would allow a lot of people who are struggling to get by or who are at or below the poverty level to get a leg up

-Little administration - instead of having to monitor how people spend the money like those on food stamps or other gov programs, people are free to spend it how they choose.

-The economy would likely get a nice boost, as millions of people will be spending more money on a monthly basis

-It would not de-incentivize work as much as conventional welfare, as it wouldn't get yanked from them once they start earning money

-People who are laid off or leave their jobs wouldn't need to be in as big of a rush to find a new job, and they hopefully wouldn't be forced to take the 1st job available

*There are a lot more pros that allow more people freedom of choice, which is very appealing to libertarian minded people like myself. Many more pros are laid out by Yang in the videos below

 

Cons:

-Price tag. He estimates the cost at $1.8 Trillion (which is ON TOP OF current welfare programs, as he doesn't propose eliminating any current programs) which is probably low-balling the actual amount

-How to pay for it. Yang proposes VAT (Value Added Tax) which is essentially a fancy marketing term for a national sales tax. He sells it by claiming that giant tech companies will be the ones paying for it, which is one of the major parts of his pitch that is intellectually dishonest. VAT would be added to every purchase you would make on Amazon, etc. That means that you, the consumer, would be paying extra for all the purchases that you're making in order to subsidize the dividend that you're collecting. It would not shave any profit off the tech companies (or very little if any)

-Subsidizing high income earners - I don't see any reason why an individual who already makes a sizable income should also collect the dividend. If the policy is about helping people who are less fortunate, then it should be just that.

-Yang proposes $1000/month/person. What's to stop the next person from increasing it to $2000? Or $5000? There's got to be some sort of limit on it (maybe a % of median income, or % of minimum wage full-time earnings - just ideas)

 

***My verdict - I appreciate that Yang brings forth a unique idea, but I can't support it how he's representing it. If we were to structure it instead as a negative income tax (like Milton Friedman advocated), as well as replace many of the current welfare programs, THAT would be an idea I'd get behind 110%.

 

What say you?

 

 

 

Link to comment

8 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

Andrew Yang is fantastic, and I think UBI will most definitely be necessary when AI completely takes over the work force.... But for now?  I don't need your money, Yang!

 

I agree about the need for it after AI takes over. When we don't need to work, having some income is great.

 

Until then, isn't UBI basically me giving myself money through taxes? I'm not going to pretend to be an economist, but every time this gets brought up I get confused as to how we pay for it, and why it wouldn't be better for me to just keep that money in my pocket in the first place.

Link to comment

58 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

I agree about the need for it after AI takes over. When we don't need to work, having some income is great.

 

Until then, isn't UBI basically me giving myself money through taxes? I'm not going to pretend to be an economist, but every time this gets brought up I get confused as to how we pay for it, and why it wouldn't be better for me to just keep that money in my pocket in the first place.

I'd rather have a "guaranteed employment" where an able bodied person wanting to work is given a job with dept of roads or something.  Even if it is just walking the streets and picking up trash.  They would still have to hold qualifications and pass drug tests if other employees do.  

 

If we're giving away tax dollars, at least get something in return...

Link to comment
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

I agree about the need for it after AI takes over. When we don't need to work, having some income is great.

 

Until then, isn't UBI basically me giving myself money through taxes? I'm not going to pretend to be an economist, but every time this gets brought up I get confused as to how we pay for it, and why it wouldn't be better for me to just keep that money in my pocket in the first place.

 

Yeah, it reeks of another unfulfilled campaign promise at this point. The need for it in the future feels undeniable, but I'm not sure it'd be a world I'd want to live in.

 

Also, it'd feel weird giving someone who makes, say $50K a month, another $1K....

Link to comment
1 minute ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

The need for it in the future feels undeniable, but I'm not sure it'd be a world I'd want to live in.

 

The world where AI runs all the factories and produces everything? Eh. I could see that being good and bad.

 

It could free us to just live, and not have to toil and drudge. No more coal miners, no more ditch diggers - no more slaves. That's OK.  But it could be abused, just like anything, and the "machines taking over" nightmare scenario is kind of a bad thing. :D

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

The world where AI runs all the factories and produces everything? Eh. I could see that being good and bad.

 

It could free us to just live, and not have to toil and drudge. No more coal miners, no more ditch diggers - no more slaves. That's OK.  But it could be abused, just like anything, and the "machines taking over" nightmare scenario is kind of a bad thing. :D

 

My worry is finding purpose. A lot of people find that in their work.... I'm sure we would adjust, especially after a generation or two.

 

Sam Harris almost has me convinced that we will soon have AI overlords :lol:

Link to comment

11 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

I wonder what the time frame on that actually is. My lifetime? One more generation?  It won't be much longer than that, for sure.

 

Technology moves quick, Knapp, but you're pretty damn old:D

 

I'm almost 33, and I think I'll safely (?) make it to retirement having to work.... Maybe I'm completely underestimating how quickly it'll happen, though.

 

 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

I agree about the need for it after AI takes over. When we don't need to work, having some income is great.

 

Until then, isn't UBI basically me giving myself money through taxes? I'm not going to pretend to be an economist, but every time this gets brought up I get confused as to how we pay for it, and why it wouldn't be better for me to just keep that money in my pocket in the first place.

No under Yangs plan UBI would be funded by a VAT which is a corperate tax. The idea is to target companies who would profit from an AI/robotic work force. I don't think its a fix all answer and I would much rather get healthcare figured out before this but it wouldn't be just you paying yourself

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

My worry is finding purpose. A lot of people find that in their work.... I'm sure we would adjust, especially after a generation or two.

 

Sam Harris almost has me convinced that we will soon have AI overlords :lol:

 

The thought is more people would find a more enriching work purpose with the benefit the Freedom Dividend would provide them.   More creativity, more arts, more chances could be taken on dreams that couldn't be done because of time and financial limitations for working at a job you didn't love.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, sho said:

 

The thought is more people would find a more enriching work purpose with the benefit the Freedom Dividend would provide them.   More creativity, more arts, more chances could be taken on dreams that couldn't be done because of time and financial limitations for working at a job you didn't love.

 

You think UBI is going to take the financial limitations off people? When we get to the point where UBI is needed, the power in this country, and others around the world, will be in the hands of an even smaller amount of people.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

You think UBI is going to take the financial limitations off people? When we get to the point where UBI is needed, the power in this country, and others around the world, will be in the hands of an even smaller amount of people.

 

I think someone making $60K as an accountant because it pays the bills would consider quitting to follow their dream of being a chef at 40K.   I think it will allow the janitor to chase their dream of owning their own cleaning service company instead of working for someone else.

 

I don't think it'll end people's reliance off of working and needing to find money.  I think it will open opportunities that they normally wouldn't take out of fear of not being able to make it.

 

 

And I would argue, it's needed now, not in the future.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...