Free Money: The Surprising Effects of a Basic Income Supplied by Government

[Toni]

What's the productivity of a person being paid to do nothing?

Greater than the productivity of a person who is unable to overcome the burdens of poverty, which include malnutrition, ill physical and mental health, lack of education and lack of job prospects.

Can we conduct this conversation as if it isn't still 1830?

So: Actually it is lower. Paying people to produce nothing results in lower productivity than not paying people to produce nothing.

I apologize for there being math involved.

What math? All I see is faulty reasoning. Or 'reasoning.' Really, just an assertion with absolutely nothing to back it up.

 

[KeepTalking]

Tip: In the real world there is a cost to society of providing the money.

Tip: In the real world, there is a cost to society imposed by poverty: ill health, both physical and emotional, manifesting itself in rather substantial costs to health care, education, social services, and so on. Much more substantial costs to the economy in terms of lost productivity by those for whom relentless poverty seems to be the only future, with no way out.

What's the productivity of a person being paid to do nothing?

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

 

[dismal]

Tip: In the real world, there is a cost to society imposed by poverty: ill health, both physical and emotional, manifesting itself in rather substantial costs to health care, education, social services, and so on. Much more substantial costs to the economy in terms of lost productivity by those for whom relentless poverty seems to be the only future, with no way out.

What's the productivity of a person being paid to do nothing?

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

 

[dismal]

Greater than the productivity of a person who is unable to overcome the burdens of poverty, which include malnutrition, ill physical and mental health, lack of education and lack of job prospects.

Can we conduct this conversation as if it isn't still 1830?

So: Actually it is lower. Paying people to produce nothing results in lower productivity than not paying people to produce nothing.

I apologize for there being math involved.

What math? All I see is faulty reasoning. Or 'reasoning.' Really, just an assertion with absolutely nothing to back it up.

OK, imagine society has a big pot of money. 1,000,000 units.

Society can:

a) pay people to do stuff.
b) pay people not to do stuff.

Which results in more stuff?

 

[KeepTalking]

What's the productivity of a person being paid to do nothing?

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

 

[sharon45]

Can we conduct this conversation as if it isn't still 1830?

So: Actually it is lower. Paying people to produce nothing results in lower productivity than not paying people to produce nothing.

I apologize for there being math involved.

What math? All I see is faulty reasoning. Or 'reasoning.' Really, just an assertion with absolutely nothing to back it up.

OK, imagine society has a big pot of money. 1,000,000 units.

Society can:

a) pay people to do stuff.
b) pay people not to do stuff.

Which results in more stuff?

Depends on what this stuff is.

 

[sharon45]

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

Only if they actually do nothing, not just because they are paid to do nothing.

 

[dismal]

What math? All I see is faulty reasoning. Or 'reasoning.' Really, just an assertion with absolutely nothing to back it up.

OK, imagine society has a big pot of money. 1,000,000 units.

Society can:

a) pay people to do stuff.
b) pay people not to do stuff.

Which results in more stuff?

Depends on what this stuff is.

Goods and services people want.

- - - Updated - - -

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

 

[Elixir]

OK, imagine society has a big pot of money. 1,000,000 units.

Society can:

a) pay people to do stuff.
b) pay people not to do stuff.

Which results in more stuff?

Depends on what this stuff is.

Goods and services people want.

- - - Updated - - -

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

If you pay me to do nothing I'll eat just fine, thank you.

 

[dismal]

Depends on what this stuff is.

Goods and services people want.

- - - Updated - - -

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

If you pay me to do nothing I'll eat just fine, thank you.

As long as the unicorns keep the food coming.

 

[Toni]

Whatever the job guarantee offers would become the minimum standard across the country. Private employers would have to beat it to hire anyone. So a job guarantee could enforce a national living wage, a national standard package of health benefits, a national work week, etc. Beyond that, a job guarantee would permanently tighten the labor market — employers would constantly be competing for workers, not workers competing for jobs. That would drive up wages, squash inequality, strengthen unions, and improve working conditions.

Where would the jobs come from?

Overall the concept makes sense, and I think the author makes an excellent point that we need BOTH job guarantees AND a universal basic income. In addition to my question of where these jobs will be coming from in an economy of shrinking job markets - I would be VERY concerned about UBI being tied to employment. I think part of the beauty of UBI is that it frees people to go to school and/or create... which in turn leads to a healthier economy and ultimately more jobs for others.

Anything and everything. Rebuilding and maintaining our crumbling infrastructure, even just picking up garbage off the side of the road or in new Arcology projects. We can find something for them to do.

Also, Handmade consumer goods produced by small start ups. What could conceivably help in this endeavor would be an infrastructure program to create 'crafts districts' think of it as an industrial apartment with the layout of a mini mall.

Everywhere, people need doctors, nurses, teachers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc.

Income that is provided is spent on goods and services, which supports jobs that produce the same.

 

[KeepTalking]

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

Only if they actually do nothing, not just because they are paid to do nothing.

Right. I suppose if they accidentally do something and the result is that they produce something, their productivity would be less than 100%, but theoretically speaking, that shouldn't happen.

 

[laughing dog]

Reality check - tribes are a society. So in the tribal society there is a cost to it in providing the money.

That only works because of white guilt and unconstitutional Indian Gaming Act. It doesn't work when law does not badeverybody not of your race from competing with you.

Neither sentence is based on reality. The Indian Gaming Act has not been declared unconstitutional. Nor are people who are not Native Americans forbidden from competing with Native Americans - there are plenty of non-Native American gaming casinos.

 

[KeepTalking]

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

I wouldn't pay someone to do nothing, so whether I would enjoy eating nothing is immaterial.

If, however, I were to pay someone to do nothing, and they then produced the nothing that I paid them to do, then their productivity at producing nothing would be 100%.

 

[thebeave]

I think a better way to understand the impact and usefulness of a UBI would be to do a survey of people who have won the lottery and received an annual lottery distribution that's roughly equivalent to the proposed UBI levels. See how the lottery winners spend the money, whether they continue to work anyway, how it improves (or destroys) their lives, keeps them out of trouble (or puts them in trouble), etc. Seems like almost a perfect, low cost experiment with all the data already out there, just waiting to be collected and analyzed. Just anecdotally I know that many lottery winners end up broke and bankrupt within a short time, but perhaps that's limited to those who receive a large, lump sum and just get a caught up in the moment. Perhaps these same people would be smarter with the money if it came annually in smaller doses.

 

[Elixir]

Goods and services people want.

- - - Updated - - -

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

If you pay me to do nothing I'll eat just fine, thank you.

As long as the unicorns keep the food coming.

Which they will, if I pay them.

 

[dismal]

Goods and services people want.

- - - Updated - - -

100%, as long as they continue to do the nothing they are paid to do.

Productivity = output/unit of input. Someone who produces nothing has no productivity.

You specifically stated that they were being paid to do nothing. So, as long as they contain to do nothing (that thing they are being paid to produce) while being expected to produce nothing, their productivity is 100%.

I hope you enjoy eating your nothing.

If you pay me to do nothing I'll eat just fine, thank you.

As long as the unicorns keep the food coming.

Which they will, if I pay them.

Unicorns don't want your money. They shit out golden nuggets.

 

[LordKiran]

Where would the jobs come from?

Overall the concept makes sense, and I think the author makes an excellent point that we need BOTH job guarantees AND a universal basic income. In addition to my question of where these jobs will be coming from in an economy of shrinking job markets - I would be VERY concerned about UBI being tied to employment. I think part of the beauty of UBI is that it frees people to go to school and/or create... which in turn leads to a healthier economy and ultimately more jobs for others.

Anything and everything. Rebuilding and maintaining our crumbling infrastructure, even just picking up garbage off the side of the road or in new Arcology projects. We can find something for them to do.

Also, Handmade consumer goods produced by small start ups. What could conceivably help in this endeavor would be an infrastructure program to create 'crafts districts' think of it as an industrial apartment with the layout of a mini mall.

Everywhere, people need doctors, nurses, teachers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc.

Income that is provided is spent on goods and services, which supports jobs that produce the same.

So include free educations for the gaps in our labor market. Or y'know just free education...

 

[Toni]

Anything and everything. Rebuilding and maintaining our crumbling infrastructure, even just picking up garbage off the side of the road or in new Arcology projects. We can find something for them to do.

Also, Handmade consumer goods produced by small start ups. What could conceivably help in this endeavor would be an infrastructure program to create 'crafts districts' think of it as an industrial apartment with the layout of a mini mall.

Everywhere, people need doctors, nurses, teachers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc.

Income that is provided is spent on goods and services, which supports jobs that produce the same.

So include free educations for the gaps in our labor market. Or y'know just free education...

Yep, that, too.

Although I admit that I have some concerns with what happens to the quality of education (in the US) if college is free. I know other countries manage it, but they also manage free health care. In the US, my only concern re: free health care is that we would fuck it up.

 

[LordKiran]

What are the things that "need doing" aren't being done? Maybe they are not being done for a reason?

As for maintaining a pool of unemployed, you wouldn't save a dime by maintaining the same people by employing them in useless busywork.

Having people pick up garbage in LA so that LA isn't covered in garbage is a value in itself. Not everything has to be about improving productivity. For such a prosperous nation its weird to see you being made nervous by the notion that we might employ people who's work can't strictly be measured in productivity throughput.

Also, work is not useless just because you deem it such.

But you have kind of made my point for me. Given how vicious Republicans tend to be - how unjustifiably putative they tend to be towards poor people, my concern is that the jobs "guaranteed" with be exactly that type of stuff... back-breaking dead-end grunt work.

Now IF, as the article seems to imply, these "job guarantees" are 100% voluntary and in no way tied to any other benefits (including UBI), then fine. But I would vastly rather see someone collect their UBI and go to college or trade school, than do a crap job because Republicans have turned a possibly good program into a boot on people's necks.

Mmmm. True but people displaced from automation won't all be poor. A lot of professions are at high risk, many requiring high end degrees.