What does Sup Forums think of a universal basic income as a replacement for all welfare programs?

What does Sup Forums think of a universal basic income as a replacement for all welfare programs?

fivethirtyeight.com/features/universal-basic-income/

Other urls found in this thread:

census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_pilots
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

where does it come from?

You :D

taxes. it would have to be a replacement for welfare programs. the idea is that it could be more efficient way to spend other people's money and make sure everyone can feed their kids

Switzerland just shot down UBI. Go look up their reasoning.

Ah yes, in this wonderful world we live in, our governments work at the peak of efficiency!

They are guaranteed to never make a single mistake.

>"Theoretically, if Switzerland were an island, the answer is yes. But with open borders, it's a total impossibility, especially for Switzerland, with a high living standard," he said.
"If you would offer every individual a Swiss amount of money, you would have billions of people who would try to move into Switzerland."

these are good criticisms. there also isn't enough research done to totally satisfy me that it's a great idea, but i see massive potential in it and it isn't discussed enough.

Instead of wasting it on special interest, you distribute the wealth among it's members.

I think it's too early. Maybe in a decade we will be ready for it

A gauranteed income is a great idea but a 'universal' basic income is mathematically and politically stupid. Why give rich people like $25K a year or whatever? Poor people in US is like %15- much cheaper to guarantee income of 48 million than 325 million.

Otherwise, great idea

> but a 'universal' basic income is mathematically and politically stupid.

It's to remove the bureaucracy from it

I would like it, if all welfare programs and minimum wage were abolished in response. But I feel like it would just be tacked on to the current welfare regime

You'd need a 30-50% tax on total GDP just to pay for that. It's unrealistic and dumb, something only a 12 year old could think.

good point, a cutoff point would likely be necessary.

the article talks about "benefit phaseout cliffs", which means that certain people earn too much to qualify for benefits but end up poorer than the people just below them that do qualify. i wonder if this would just create new cliffs

Still cheaper to means test and limit basic income grant to those who need it than mail a check to 325 million people, no?

It's stupid. It will fail for the same reason communism always fails: It punishes hard work and productivity and rewards laziness.

another idea i had, what if it was universal and the condition of getting the money was that you HAD to spend it? anything not spent got cycled back in to next year's money. a way to guarantee at least stimulation of the economy, the question is how much

Depends on whether or not the able bodied are required to work for it or not. Combining infrastructure programs with welfare would be ideal.

So.... Just more welfare. Pass

Wouldn't a negative income tax make more sense?

Do the math and then we can discuss it. Dont propose shit to consider if it isnt even financially feasible.

I think its a good thing as an alternative for shitty government services.

That way when the bottom-feeders of society say they're broke you can point out all the ways they squandered their gubbermint money.

What's the difference? I still say fuck taxes

>It punishes hard work and productivity and rewards laziness.

how does it punish hard work? also, it'd be somewhere around $15-20k a year - hardly a luxury. it's not like things would be easy for people who didn't want to work at all.

Negative income tax is a means to distribute a basic income.

very very very few people would not have their lives measurably improved by a free 12k a year or so

problem is basket ball american and futbol americans will squander they free gibs and then will demand welfare

UBI is nothing but a ponzi scheme to bankroll non-whites on the back of whites and east asians

>basic income = state control of the economy
liberetards everyone.

Communism doesn't work.

It'll fail for the same reason the welfare state has failed in America: demographics. Most poor people will not be able to spend that money well and they'll just exist as an underclass on welfare.

a replacement for welfare. read the article.

they talk about this as well

discussing ideas, son. if there were enough research to talk numbers, we would be.

give people a check each month totaling about $15-20k per year. they spend it on whatever they want.

taxes are inevitable, this is just a way of streamlining every welfare service into one and leaving people on their own to survive.

That's their problem

That will ensure that minorities have a shitton of kids they niglect for more income

those people are already there

>then will demand welfare
there is none though. tough shit for them. people will learn

So why should we continue to incentive that behaviour with fancy new welfare? It doesn't work.

>linking to discredited Nate Bronze's site
ok, let me click that hide button over there
there it is, shit I should hit post first

People (niggers) would find a way to starve unless we made sure they're spending it on food

universal basic income has literally never been tried. you can't say authoritatively that "it doesn't work". if you could, it wouldn't be a discussion.

That's what I think. In a decade or so it will start being necessary as mechanization takes over too many jobs. It's not about "gibmedats" or racism or the other shit Sup Forums talks about, it's a simple fact that as robots replace more jobs, something needs to be done for the people who lose those jobs. We're not quite there yet but will be soon; self-driving cars alone will get rid of a ton of jobs soon

the whole reason you'd switch to UBI is to get rid of the welfare program that gives people money for kids. they wouldnt get any more income for having more kids.

The moment the government gives me free money for simply existing is the moment I start only leaving my basement once a month to buy bulk foodstuffs

Why the fuck would I work a job just to have most of the income taxed to be redistributed to niggers? AT MOST I would get a part time job every now and then to buy something like a new computer or something to entertain me.

>problem is basket ball american and futbol americans will squander they free gibs and then will demand welfare
Anyone that starves because they spent all their free money on stupid shit deserves it.

We would need border controls that would have Trump saying "woah, hold on guys isn't this a bit extreme?"

but it would be a tremendous boost to our economy and quality of life, in addition to getting rid of a great deal of pointless bureaucracy.

because it helps the people that aren't on welfare?

those aren't the reasons communism failed.

> basic income
> welfare
two different things

I support this and a lot of other socialist problems and make no bones about it. I wouldn't give it a vote or write a letter to a legislator about it, though, until
>Our immigration system, citizenship requirements, and other similar measures are put into place to ensure only Americans receive it; a constitutional amendment is made to declare that this becomes the role of the government; a second constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget

>If we're giving it to everyone, I don't want it.
>Nowhere in the constitution does it sat that the role of the government is to do a majority of what it does
>If we're going to do it, we have to afford it.

> basic income
> communism
not the same thing

We shouldn't have it in the first place. Honestly with UBI, poor people will probably starve because they can't manage money.

It's basically welfare for everyone.

It won't work out at all. Sorry liberals, for spoiling your ideal world.

how the fuck is giving everyone a free money each month the same as a government or workers controlling the means of labor and setting quotes and prices

I am in fact a newfag who does not know how to greentext

>niggers
>learning

lol

If millions of migrants flood your country, it will be impossible because of pure hard mathematics.

I don't really like the thought of just giving people money, but if you're gonna do it might as do it for everyone. Would really need to rethink our immigration and border policies, even more than Trump is doing if people were serious about implementing it.

I think it's better than letting certain groups breed for a living, that's for sure.

>projection
>if i'm lazy, everyone else must be too

more white people on welfare than minorities etc etc

>what is proportion

Ya and fucking a 16 y/o isn't pedophilia.

In comparison to the current welfare state we have is the key word
Yes it is better than that but that's like saying 3rd degree burns are better than getting shot in the dick.

Both are fundamentally bad and cancerous.

>as a replacement for all welfare programs

good luck getting that to pass

If I read you correctly, you will do just fine.

>what is irrelevant to the discussion at hand

> basic income
> welfare
different things

>implying you can give the liberals a cookie and then just ignore their non-stop demands for milk forever.

they never stop. they never are satisfied.

>It's the poor people are poor because they can't manage money fallacy

Nah m8, there are a multitude of ways to slip through the cracks in society and end up in poverty.

I put it to you that most poor people are poor because they are unemployed or underemployed. I will grant you that *some* people are terrible at managing money and that is why they are poor, but that it is not the majority.

then enjoy the fruits of the work and sacrifice of your ancestors. i don't judge you for it, as thats what they worked for

course one day you'll want to build or create something. UBI also takes away the largest risk of entrepreneuring, losing everything in a failed venture

>ambition will magically appear
No, lazy unschooled idiots I'll remain lazy unschooled idiots.

Also being a selfish prick to future generations is rude. You're more greedy than the boomers.

I would contest that. Too many people buy dumb shit that they don't need and squander their money instead of saving and investing it.

Hard to say if the majority of people that are poor and living paycheck to paycheck spend their money entirely on necessities with prudent entertainment and luxury purchases.

I'd be interested to see some unbiased, hard data on this at least.

You know Timmy, when people belly rumbles, you know, what happens to you when you skip lunch, those people get very angry. And they could be mean to you. Really mean. You understand, little Timmy?

Lol pretty much all libertarian thinkers like Mises, Friedman et al support a basic income or negative income tax.

Fact is, if done properly it could be more effective than current welfare programs while costing us less by axing the bureaucracies.

pension = welfare ; are you against that

Really, liberals promote this ?

According to this image we'd have $2,206,203 million dollars from Social Security, Income Security, Medicare, and Health. Spread across an estimated adult population (for 2014) of 245 million adults (census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00) gives us $9004 per adult. A bit underwhelming to be quite honest familia.

>UBI also takes away the largest risk of entrepreneuring, losing everything in a failed venture
it takes the risk away but it makes the possibility of doing so available to wayyy more people

It's not

So you're going to let people starve?!

The reasoning is it is
1)universal, meaning the rich have just as much right to it as the poor
2)The rich will pay it back in income and consumption tax anyway
3)It eliminates welfare traps because you still get it no matter what you earn, encouraging low income people to go out and work
4)It is cheaper to administer

the computer that the jews control.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_pilots

ambition does not appear out of thin air true. but there are many who can't afford to take risks

all i'm hearing you spout is projection. niggers don't work now. they won't work under this system

just means you'll have to work harder to get above your competition. which means better product or service

its going to happen eventually
the singularity is just around the corner

>Punishes hard work
The rich are entitled to the basic income as well.

>this is just a way of streamlining every welfare service into one and leaving people on their own to survive.
Yeah that's what you think will happen. Its like giving a homeless drug addict money. You tell him you gave him that money to feed himself but he's just going back to the crack house down the street in 2 hours.

What is communism?

you are the one projecting a magical desire to work when someone can live a neet life

You're eventually going to run out of other people's money

people voluntarily leaving the workplace will do any of the following

>they become neets
>they become self employed
>they focus on arts/writing whatever
>they support a degenerate social life
>they become a stay at home parent

regardless it will raise wages for people who continue working

Not if you're 16

I agree. Strict border control or making the UBI contingent on citizenship is necessary to make sure the hordes don't fuck the system.

you're making the assumption that people like being NEETs. have you ever been to /r9k/?

Like the banks in '08?

Do you enjoy working?

It might work in a homogenous country of 2 million people even then it still probably won.

So it would pretty much equate to supplemental income for most people. Most people would still need to work at least part time or find some additional source of revenue.

Why do we need welfare or basic income?

Fuck people who don't make money.

Call me a racist.

I was rather skeptical of the concept, it sounded like communism except there is a glass floor and no glass roof.
But in the context of the western welfare states it makes some sense, nut not enough sense.
The big fat problem is that it ties the hands of the government by making it a 'right' to get money.
It's no longer money for being blind or having no legs or for being 70+ years old.
It's no longer 'money until you get a job" or "money for the kids" or "money for veterans".
It makes a whole lot of people who aren't equally disadvantaged get the same money to get by, and that's not even socialism, that's bullshit.

I completely support it because it finites the exploitability of numerous granular welfare programs.

It also removes the overhead of recipient determination/evaluation.

What as size and demographics got to do with it?