Why the world should adopt a basic income

Unskilled productive labor will have to be subsidized if the minimum wage is eliminated.

 

Correct.

But the "subsidization" can be achieved in a number of ways.

Some might come from the bloated wages at the top, through a more equitable tax system; the last thing we need is more billionaires funding space flights for the ultra wealthy.

Another way is via adoption of MMT principles, in as far as these principles are practicable; certainly worthy of testing in a scientific manner.

 

It's beyond you because you are incapable of understanding the concept of rule of law. [Hint: Law can apply in local, national and international spheres, with the appropriate court dealing with the appropriate jurisdiction].

I'm well aware of the issues involved in questioning individual belief and ideology, so we are near the end of this discussion.

[Libertarianism: an extreme reaction - anachronistic in our times - to the institutional oppression of the divine right of kings].

One point you made deserves addressing.

"Only a small number of independent schools exist in Finland, and even they are all publicly financed. None is allowed to charge tuition fees. There are no private universities, either. This means that practically every person in Finland attends public school, whether for pre-K or a Ph.D.Dec 29, 2011" (Wikipedia)

and

"The number of independent schools with public funding, so-called charter schools, is growing in Sweden. ... These publicly funded non-municipal schools are called friskola (charter school) to differentiate them from tuition-based private schools (of which there are only a handful left in Sweden).Oct 10, 2018"

Depends how you define socialism I suppose.

 

I just gave you an example of a worker whose output does not support paying them even the current minimum wage, much less the push for $15 that we're seeing everywhere. Using simple math that a grade schooler could calculate. So are you suggesting that the rest of us should involuntarily chip in to increase this worthless guys wages to whatever you think is appropriate? That makes you a thief.

 

I am fully aware and fully understand the rule of law AND the principle of the sovereignty of countries and their citizens and note you inablilty to discuss it. Nor do you understand tis country, hopefully, will never weaken that.

They all did and that you can't demonstrates your inability to do so.w

So what?

That does not mean they come an international law or socialist economic policies.

 

Follow the money. It flows into government and funds the massive bureaucracy that sustains our corrupt bipartisan political class.
There are unlimited jobs begging for workers, but local employers can't pay the minimum wage, and workers cannot survive on the market wage.
Take revenue from failed or inefficient programs and put it in vested individual accounts to meet the special needs of productive unskilled workers.

Anyone who really wants to make billionaires pay their fair share of taxes should support a 10% flat tax for everyone - no loopholes.
A 1 paragraph tax code. Any other approach will result in a privileged elite with tax breaks.

Ordinary human beings should all have a strong bias against Big Government. Less Government = More Freedom. The Left used to know that.

 

It has become obvious that Big Government "solutions" always serve primarily a corrupt ruling political class and its dependent special interests. Almost everyone across the political spectrum now knows this. Hence the emerging massive populist anti-establishment movement.

 

"Nearly 1/2 of the world's population — more than 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than 1.3 billion live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. 1 billion children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die each day due to poverty."

Meanwhile Bezos has amassed a personal fortune of $150 billion, from selling stuff - not creating anything - and putting competitors all around the globe out of business.

You talk about theft....

 

Yes, but you are turning the wrong way - to Libertarianism, with its delusion that unfettered individual economic liberty is compatible with community cohesion and universal prosperity.

 

Not at all. Libertarianism, like anarchism is a fairy tale that ignores the inevitability of a significant government structure. The American Revolution, the first and and so far only true successful revolution in human history had the right idea. Limited government and checks and balances is the right approach, but it is not foolproof. Alas.

Even Marx and Lenin agreed, that the American system, prior to the run up to WW I, was too good to justify a revolutionary movement.

 

Spoken like a person who hasn't taken the steps to obtain wealth, so desires to take it.

Get a job.

 

Marx and Lenin didn't live to see the downside eg, catastrophic events caused by unregulated American capitalism such the Great Depression and the GFC.

In a global economy, regulatory oversight is required to ensure prosperous development in all nations - obviously.

 

Lenin did. That is why he condemned America for creating a massive European style bureaucracy in preparation for WW I.

Prior to that he and Marx before him were actually rather pro-American.

 

Get a brain. I have a Master's Degree in economics.

What's your excuse for posting in an "Economics Forum" ... ?

 

Blah, blah, blah ...

 

Im not impressed with degrees. I have one of those two, in a profession that is in the Sciences, so I do pretty well.

What does impress me is people that take those degrees and apply them in a format that actually understands economics.

Let's see if this question can be answered.

Why does anybody deserve a Basic Income simply for being lucky enough to be born and being able to breath? Any money that is provided through a BI has to come from the fruits of somebody elses labor. You do realize this, right? A basic of economics?

 

But, for national defense the situation is different? Nope, it is considered a necessity that is provided to the general public by means of National Taxation.

So should any other necessity that is fundamental to healthy-living - and most people who take advantage of a National Health Service in Europe believe they have a right to one that is the least expensive possible. (Moreover, as I never tire of repeating, the fact that Europeans have a National Health Service is the primary reason their life-span is four years more than in the US!)

That same reasoning goes for a Tertiary-level Education that is becoming more and more decisive in terms of upper-income employment. Without that diploma, a significant percentage of the population simply do not get a job at a decent salary nowadays.

Most experiments to date with a guaranteed minimum income (that pays for housing and food but not much else) have been found to be of positive merit. It is the very least a nation can do for its people. Food and housing are the basic necessities of life - so why should they not be "subventioned" in a country that creates bundles and bundles of billionaires.

And if it make billionaires why should a nation not tax them to provide the subvention to those who need it most? And because that guaranteed-financial-support is not available, what do these people do? They end up in prison, where about 60% of the inmates do not have even a high-school degree.

So, your taxes are paying for their upkeep anyway ... !!!

 

Well, I am.

I passed a career in Hi-tech and had to hire some very smart people. They all had educational degrees of some sort.

That is still the case today - except that we are not finding enough of the right talent. So, of we go to India where there are educated people and hire them. Why are they educated? Because the Indian government assures their education at state-run schools.

So, there we are: We go off to India (or some other country where tertiary education is free, gratis and for nothing) and hire people for top-jobs because we can't find enough of them in the US!

Get it ... ? (It is soooo patently obvious what is happening!)

 

Fully different thing.

In the case of the military, or roads, border security, or any most of the other federal expenditures, money is collected from everybody for a benefit that serves everybody.

What you are doing here is collecting money for the benefit of a few.

Much different things.

People make individual decisions every day in life, that impacts their life span and how healthy living they are? I am not sure why I would be expected to be responsible for these decisions.

In any case, I am not sure what this has to do with a Basic Income.

You sure are liberal with spending other people's money for the collective benefit.

Our tertiary education system is so problematic, tens of thousands of people from across the world come here to attend our Universities.

With all of that being said, the major contributor to the cost of higher education in this country is the salaries and pensions of administrators and faculty.

See... like most things, we have allowed the government the opportunity to raid tax dollars without a care of market value rates for those positions and in turn have created an environment of complete un-affordability for much of the population. It is now cheaper in many states, such as my own (Illinois) to attend a private University than to attend a public school.

Again, though, I am not sure what this has to do with a Basic Income.

So far in this thread alone, you have advocated: Free money for breathing, free education, and free healthcare.

What exactly is your motivation to get lazy people to actually contribute to the society that provides for them? WIth your model, I could sit at home, eat whatever I want, take a few online courses, and get free medical coverage. Simply for being alive.

Can you please source one of these studies. I would love to read it.

Ahhh we are back to subjective correlation. People are very rich, so poor people should get "X".

Its just all about freebies and jealousy. I am sorry you are like that, but it really can't be disputed.

 

You are impressed with a piece of paper say somebody jumped through hoops? That seems silly.

Most of what I learned in college was foundational to the real learning that was done in the marketplace and real world. Many people can obtain several degrees, graduate or doctorate level, and still have zero understanding of what the real world is like.

There are many trades people that have more street smarts and common sense than your run of the mill Philosophy Doctoral candidate.

My field as well. All of my staff have a minimum of a graduate degree. They have to as a prerequisite of their employment. That doesn't however make them smart.

I have hired more than one advanced degree person that ended up taking a different path because they could read a book and pass a test but simply couldn't understand simple logic, problem solving, or the reality of business.

Again.. its a piece of paper.

Actually no. Your perspective is very skewed. Most of those Indians with advanced degrees living and working in the United States came HERE for their education. They didn't leave.

The idea that a free education system in India resulted in mass migration to the US to fill voids that can't be filled here is absolutely inaccurate.

Our Universities pull people from all over the world.

 

Even if you downplay the human capital role, its still more than just a piece of paper! For example, its used to stratify the workforce. Good ole divide and conquer.

 

its part of the crusade against science. If liberals can develop a survival of the weakest society, they can prove evolution and then all of science is inferior to liberalism.

 

Most successful for accomplishing the most?

Ain't good enough - that's what politics is all about.

 

Hm....and yet still "your neighbourhoods are like war zones, your schools and hospitals are broken..": Donald Trump.

Can you expound on this a little?

We know workers can't survive on the minimum wage without access to food stamps and other government support. Nor can they survive on the market wage?

So how do you eliminate poverty-level wages?

Sounds sensible.

Can you say (approx.) how much tax would be raised with this flat tax system, cf. the money raised by the current (admittedly faulty) tax system? And how do you eliminate company tax avoidance in overseas jurisdictions, without an international oversight mechanism?

Get back to me when you have eliminated poverty.

The resources exist in the world to feed, house, clothe and transport everyone.

Apparently when Stiglitz pointed this out, he was forced to resign from the board of the World Bank.

 

1. "Lucky enough to be born"?

"Nearly 1/2 of the world's population — more than 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than 1.3 billion live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. 1 billion children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die each day due to poverty."

Obviously many are born into Hell - that ain't lucky! (Literally: That's what the vision of the Left is always seeking to change.

2. "Money has to come from the fruits of somebody else's labour? A Basic of economics?"

Well of course everybody ought to be employed, whether in the public sector (in which there is an infinite amount of work to be done) or private sector. AKA as a job guarantee, with above poverty -level wages. (See MMT; different to a UBI).

You are confusing "money" with real resources. (Admittedly MMT requires an international rules based system, to be able to realise its vision of sustainable resource allocation with sufficiency for all, operating alongside a profit-driven market system).

So you end up expending scarce resources on the preparation for war. (Is the Nuclear Disarmament Treaty about to disappear under the baleful influence of the American Right? At least Obama didn't alienate the entire world, as Trump is doing).