How to Fix Poverty: Write Every Family a Basic Income Check

[Janelle2002 3,865]

In the United States—as in all of the world’s wealthier nations—ending poverty is not a matter of resources. Many economists, including Timothy Smeeding of the University of Wisconsin (and former director of the Institute for Research on Poverty) have argued that every developed nation has the financial wherewithal to eradicate poverty. In large part this is because post-industrial productivity has reached the point where to suggest a deficit in resources is laughably disingenuous. And despite the occasional political grandstanding against welfare, there is no policy, ideology or political party that is on the books as pro-starvation, pro-homelessness, pro-death or anti-dignity.

Yet, poverty continues to exist. In the U.S., for example, almost 15 percent of citizens (and almost 20 percent of children) live in poverty. Of those, slightly under 2 percent live on less than $2 per person per day.

The main problem is logistical. The current U.S. welfare systems take in trillions of dollars and provide fairly little utility on a dollar-for-dollar basis. There’s unhappiness on both sides of the political aisle—conservatives harrumph about “welfare queens” and liberals complain about the expensive drug testing required to collect welfare checks, for example. Welfare as it exists today is fragmented to the point of making effective oversight impossible, mired in red tape and inconsistent between cities, states and the federal government. And because of that, in the richest nation in the world, people starve.

But there may be a solution. Some might see it as radical, but advocates, both libertarian and liberal, are suggesting straight up cash: a guaranteed subsidy to everyone. "We've got to a technological level now where no one needs to work the traditional 40-hour week," says Barbara Jacobson, chair of Unconditional Basic Income–Europe, an alliance of European citizens and organizations that advocate for such subsidies. But while productivity per hour across developing nations has increased dramatically since the 1970s, “this has not meant a rise in wages, or a fall in hours without a pay cut,” says Jacobson. And on top of that, she adds, there is a significant amount of “crucial work, generally caring work, which isn't paid for, but without which society would collapse.” The people doing this type of work—parenting and elder care, for example—often end up broke; if you are a single parent, it’s often not feasible to hold a traditional, wage-paying job while also taking care of three kids and your mother who has Alzheimer’s.

A simple cash subsidy—$15,000 per year (which is about what the average retiree gets annually from Social Security) for every household, say—would give the poor and middle class a financial floor on which they could live, take care of their loved ones and maybe, says Jacobson, "think about what really needs doing, what they would like to do, what they have trained to do, as opposed to simply what someone might hire them to do."

It makes financial sense for the cash-strapped U.S. government. In 2012, the federal government spent $786 billion on Social Security and $94 billion on unemployment. Additionally, federal and state governments together spent $1 trillion on welfare of the food stamp variety. Adding those costs together, that's $1.88 trillion. This number shows no signs of falling—in fact, the number of people seeking social services each year is increasing, as is the rate of homelessness, and as the baby boomer generation ages, more and more will need the support of Social Security.

In switching over to a universal basic income, the books will not only stay balanced—they might even move into the black. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 115,227,000 households in the U.S. Split $1.88 trillion among all these households and each one gets $16,315.62. In other words, if you turned the welfare system into a $15,000 basic income payment, you’d end up saving over $150 billion (or $1,315.62 per American household).

The basic proposal can be tweaked, of course, so that the system makes a bit more sense. Households making over $100,000 per year probably get by just fine on their own. Cut them out of the equation, and you would end up with a $20,000 basic income check for the remaining households, while still netting the government some nice savings.

Despite the pleasingly round back-of-the-napkin math, replacing food stamps and other artifacts of America’s welfare system with no-strings-attached cash isn’t that easy. There’s the small matter, for example, of stitching together all of the patchwork social program providers—federal, state and local governments—and getting them to agree to all put in to one kitty. It’s also controversial. Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, a columnist for The Week, worries that if we gave everyone basic incomes to cover their necessities, it might encourage a mass exodus from the workforce as people no longer “need” to work to survive. And the fear that some kind of basic income might tank the economy by allowing “freeloaders” is hardly a new apprehension: Richard Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan, which proposed a modest basic income of $1,600 per family (plus $800 in food stamps) was opposed by conservatives in 1970 because it lacked work requirements; once those were added, the left, fearing the requirements were too onerous, opposed the bill. Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan never passed.

http://www.newsweek.com/how-fix-poverty-write-every-family-basic-income-check-291583

[decocker 7,198]

now now it's not about eradicating poverty, it's about teaching these hard headed poor people a lesson.

[VOL 425]

If the USA would kick out all Illegal aliens, there would be no one unemployed.

I live in the fastest growing city in the USA for the last 10 years, you pull up on any residential construction site and there is not a single person who is legal or can speak a lick of English.

The sorry POS have decided to take any and all job they can and do it for about 1/2 the price per hour and then pay no taxes, and then they will live 6 to 10 people inside a small one or two bedroom apartment.

[decocker 7,198]

If the USA would kick out all Illegal aliens, there would be no one unemployed.

I live in the fastest growing city in the USA for the last 10 years, you pull up on any residential construction site and there is not a single person who is legal or can speak a lick of English.

The sorry POS have decided to take any and all job they can and do it for about 1/2 the price per hour and then pay no taxes, and then they will live 6 to 10 people inside a small one or two bedroom apartment.

maybe if the usa would start cracking down on businesses who hire illegal foreign speaking POS.

[Operator 1,927]

This POS spits mad rhymes ladies

[novedsac 355]

If the USA would kick out all Illegal aliens, there would be no one unemployed.

I live in the fastest growing city in the USA for the last 10 years, you pull up on any residential construction site and there is not a single person who is legal or can speak a lick of English.

The sorry POS have decided to take any and all job they can and do it for about 1/2 the price per hour and then pay no taxes, and then they will live 6 to 10 people inside a small one or two bedroom apartment.

Baloney.

There are plenty of illegal aliens who speak excellent English; and plenty of legal immigrants who speak little to no English and get along just fine.

And I highly doubt you have the capacity or wherewithal to determine for a fact the immigration status of day laborers; even less so their tax records.

Edited December 15, 2014 by novedsac

[Janelle2002 3,865]

now now it's not about eradicating poverty, it's about teaching these hard headed poor people a lesson.

and line he pockets of politicians. You left that out.

I think this is a very good plan. Especially if it comes out cheaper than welfare and everyone gets a slice of the pie.

[j&ana 363]

If the USA would kick out all Illegal aliens, there would be no one unemployed.

I live in the fastest growing city in the USA for the last 10 years, you pull up on any residential construction site and there is not a single person who is legal or can speak a lick of English.

The sorry POS have decided to take any and all job they can and do it for about 1/2 the price per hour and then pay no taxes, and then they will live 6 to 10 people inside a small one or two bedroom apartment.

I doubt that there would be no unemployed people. I see a lot of homeless people with signs ,that are very capable of working . It is not because they can not find job. They just want to get money for their booze and drugs. These are not Illegal aliens Yes there are honest homeless people, but there are some that are very capable of working but will not. I do agree that We have too many illegal aliens and the immigration laws need to be change. However exactly how will kicking out all illegal aliens created no unemployment

[decocker 7,198]

and line he pockets of politicians. You left that out.

I think this is a very good plan. Especially if it comes out cheaper than welfare and everyone gets a slice of the pie.

if everyone gets a slice of the pie, then no one learns the value of starvation. if no one knows how horrible it is to be hungry, then no one will prepare pie for consumption ever again.

The main problem is logistical. The current U.S. welfare systems take in trillions of dollars and provide fairly little utility on a dollar-for-dollar basis. There’s unhappiness on both sides of the political aisle—conservatives harrumph about “welfare queens” and liberals complain about the expensive drug testing required to collect welfare checks, for example. Welfare as it exists today is fragmented to the point of making effective oversight impossible, mired in red tape and inconsistent between cities, states and the federal government. And because of that, in the richest nation in the world, people starve.

[j&ana 363]

In the United States—as in all of the world’s wealthier nations—ending poverty is not a matter of resources. Many economists, including Timothy Smeeding of the University of Wisconsin (and former director of the Institute for Research on Poverty) have argued that every developed nation has the financial wherewithal to eradicate poverty. In large part this is because post-industrial productivity has reached the point where to suggest a deficit in resources is laughably disingenuous. And despite the occasional political grandstanding against welfare, there is no policy, ideology or political party that is on the books as pro-starvation, pro-homelessness, pro-death or anti-dignity.

Yet, poverty continues to exist. In the U.S., for example, almost 15 percent of citizens (and almost 20 percent of children) live in poverty. Of those, slightly under 2 percent live on less than $2 per person per day.

The main problem is logistical. The current U.S. welfare systems take in trillions of dollars and provide fairly little utility on a dollar-for-dollar basis. There’s unhappiness on both sides of the political aisle—conservatives harrumph about “welfare queens” and liberals complain about the expensive drug testing required to collect welfare checks, for example. Welfare as it exists today is fragmented to the point of making effective oversight impossible, mired in red tape and inconsistent between cities, states and the federal government. And because of that, in the richest nation in the world, people starve.

But there may be a solution. Some might see it as radical, but advocates, both libertarian and liberal, are suggesting straight up cash: a guaranteed subsidy to everyone. "We've got to a technological level now where no one needs to work the traditional 40-hour week," says Barbara Jacobson, chair of Unconditional Basic Income–Europe, an alliance of European citizens and organizations that advocate for such subsidies. But while productivity per hour across developing nations has increased dramatically since the 1970s, “this has not meant a rise in wages, or a fall in hours without a pay cut,” says Jacobson. And on top of that, she adds, there is a significant amount of “crucial work, generally caring work, which isn't paid for, but without which society would collapse.” The people doing this type of work—parenting and elder care, for example—often end up broke; if you are a single parent, it’s often not feasible to hold a traditional, wage-paying job while also taking care of three kids and your mother who has Alzheimer’s.

A simple cash subsidy—$15,000 per year (which is about what the average retiree gets annually from Social Security) for every household, say—would give the poor and middle class a financial floor on which they could live, take care of their loved ones and maybe, says Jacobson, "think about what really needs doing, what they would like to do, what they have trained to do, as opposed to simply what someone might hire them to do."

It makes financial sense for the cash-strapped U.S. government. In 2012, the federal government spent $786 billion on Social Security and $94 billion on unemployment. Additionally, federal and state governments together spent $1 trillion on welfare of the food stamp variety. Adding those costs together, that's $1.88 trillion. This number shows no signs of falling—in fact, the number of people seeking social services each year is increasing, as is the rate of homelessness, and as the baby boomer generation ages, more and more will need the support of Social Security.

In switching over to a universal basic income, the books will not only stay balanced—they might even move into the black. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 115,227,000 households in the U.S. Split $1.88 trillion among all these households and each one gets $16,315.62. In other words, if you turned the welfare system into a $15,000 basic income payment, you’d end up saving over $150 billion (or $1,315.62 per American household).

The basic proposal can be tweaked, of course, so that the system makes a bit more sense. Households making over $100,000 per year probably get by just fine on their own. Cut them out of the equation, and you would end up with a $20,000 basic income check for the remaining households, while still netting the government some nice savings.

Despite the pleasingly round back-of-the-napkin math, replacing food stamps and other artifacts of America’s welfare system with no-strings-attached cash isn’t that easy. There’s the small matter, for example, of stitching together all of the patchwork social program providers—federal, state and local governments—and getting them to agree to all put in to one kitty. It’s also controversial. Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, a columnist for The Week, worries that if we gave everyone basic incomes to cover their necessities, it might encourage a mass exodus from the workforce as people no longer “need” to work to survive. And the fear that some kind of basic income might tank the economy by allowing “freeloaders” is hardly a new apprehension: Richard Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan, which proposed a modest basic income of $1,600 per family (plus $800 in food stamps) was opposed by conservatives in 1970 because it lacked work requirements; once those were added, the left, fearing the requirements were too onerous, opposed the bill. Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan never passed.

http://www.newsweek.com/how-fix-poverty-write-every-family-basic-income-check-291583

Give the people who work or the ones that actually try to find jobs money. So the lazy people who just want to collect welfare will actually have to work or look for a job

[Janelle2002 3,865]

http://www.newsweek.com/how-fix-poverty-write-every-family-basic-income-check-291583

Give the people who work or the ones that actually try to find jobs money. So the lazy people who just want to collect welfare will actually have to work or look for a job

great proposal.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Tried that in China and the USSR ... How did that work out for them .

[VOL 425]

maybe if the usa would start cracking down on businesses who hire illegal foreign speaking POS.

I think Oklahoma has done this, made it a Felony to hire illegal and take their business license. And I think it a felony to transport a illegal alien.

All the Illegals cleared out and came to Texas.....

[lostinblue 1,989]

if everyone gets a slice of the pie, then no one learns the value of starvation. if no one knows how horrible it is to be hungry, then no one will prepare pie for consumption ever again.

You stoners could be stoned all year long Just get your check .

[j&ana 363]

Tried that in China and the USSR ... How did that work out for them .

I do not know. How did it work out?