Boston Review: Basic Income Is a Dead End

[godhandiscen]

http://bostonreview.net/class-inequality/anke-hassel-basic-income-dead-end

But the financial aspect is not even the most important argument against a basic income. Basic income is a seductive poison. It would benefit the margins of society at the expense of the middle class. For the poor and long-term unemployed, basic income would remove the pressure to find work and the unpleasant task of actively look for employment. It most likely would not cost the rich any more than before, and would help ease their conscience. Growing inequality would no longer be a social scandal, since everyone would have an income, albeit close to the poverty line. It is precisely for this reason that there are three main arguments against an unconditional basic income

I am very ambivalent about this topic. What do you think?

 

[gatti-man]

I don't see how a basic income would work in our current structure.

 

[ZaCH3000]

Why not focus test?

 

[KDR_11k]

So which is it, causes complacency or unfair because near the poverty line?

The reason for the basic income move is that jobs are disappearing, especially for the lower classes. The GOP solution was always to hurt the poor more with the logic that that'll make them get jobs but that doesn't make jobs appear from nowhere.

When asked what they want to do for a living, children from parts of Berlin with a high percentage of working-class and migrant families, such as Neukölln, today already often say they plan to go on the dole.

Saying "I'll be on Hartz IV for life" is not aspiration, it's desperation. It means "I will probably never find a job". Teachers handing out application forms are not saying it's easier this way but that the chances of getting a job are too small.

 

[Sectorseven]

People who don't want to work are probably better off not in the work force anyway, since more than likely they'd be doing a half ass job and taking jobs from people who actually want them.

 

[Team Alucard]

It's a poisonous idea that completely ignores the social, cultural, and psychological impact of unemployment.

What is needed is a colossal expansion of the public sector. When the private sector is unwilling or incapable of investing to create new jobs, government needs to step in, even if it's unnecessary and 'inefficient' bloat.

FDR knew this, which is why he created the WPA even when it would have been cheaper to just give money to people outright.

 

[MrOogieBoogie]

People who don't want to work are probably better off not in the work force anyway, since more than likely they'd be doing a half ass job and taking jobs from people who actually want them.

Many people doing half-ass jobs aren't necessarily doing half-ass jobs because they don't want to work but because the job sucks and NO BODY wants it.

 

[Opto]

Why not focus test?

There have been. Lots of people still work cause who doesn't want more money? Only now they're not so stressed

 

[Breads]

Then let's address income inequality.

Because not addressing either pretty much stinks of being pro-inequality as lower/ middle class jobs disappear to automation.

 

[Ether_Snake]

It will work in culturally homogeneous societies with small populations and energy independence, whereas it will distort if not eliminate democracy in larger ones like the US as its sustainability would become a matter of national security.

The #1 priority for a stable future is reduction in population count, which will lower the cost of BI and increase the standard of living it would provide, as well as reaching energy independence which also reduces said cost and can lead to self-sufficiency.


Also more free time means more flat-earthers and conspiracy theorists, mental illness, and so on. Again, this would be an issue in the US and would contribute to move the US towards a post-democracy society.

 

[Joeku]

Basic income is a dead end and millenials and Gen Z'ers are the wall at the end of the alley. Millenials shouldn't buy avocados because they can't afford houses. Gen Z'ers are killing Macy's by not wasting money there. Why isn't this all coming together? *counts money while smoking cigar*

Spoiler

No arguments against (or, unfortunately yet, for) universal basic income is valid until it is properly documented, but American industries resigning themselves to automation without being aware of the impact on workers is woefully idiotic. Without people to pay for anything in your fucking economy you aren't going to get anywhere. Digital bootstraps aren't a thing, you stupid trickling fucks.

Edit: We aren't that far away from the point that robots should effectively we doing all the work while our species reaps all the benefits, but rich shareholding fucks won't just let that be enough and will seek to enslave humanity for the sake of their dividends.

I suggest we preemptively guillotine them.

Edit2: Ether, parts of Canada are on the verge of UBI and we are anything if not culturally homogenous.

 

[Imperfected]

We can't have Basic Income because the entire problem with the poor is that they're lazy good-for-nothings? Oh man, this a hot take, I bet no one's ever approached the discussion from this angle!

 

[Iksenpets]

This is a lot of talking points with very little evidence. There's no evidence that moderate UBIs lead to people opting not to work, and even if they did, that effect could be countered by offering wage subsidies to make work more attractive as well. The point about immigration is really just an extension of this same point, and runs into similar problems. It feels like a half-hearted attempt to throw in an argument that would appeal to liberals. The point that there would be no support because it doesn't have a strong social justice function could just as easily go the other way. Welfare measures targeted specifically at the poor often face their hardest resistance from the lower middle class, who have just enough money to not qualify for the benefits, and resent the program for not benefiting them. UBI increases the political appeal of welfare by making it universal, so everyone gains from strengthening the prorgam, and everyone loses if its weakened.

This also ignores the effects that broadly targeted welfare policies can have on the economy as a whole. A universal system of basic welfare services frees people up, not to not work, but to take more risks, to try to take a stab at being self-employed to trying to launch a small business, without the fear of complete financial ruin hanging over them. What conservatives who supposedly care about the free market always miss is that welfare benefits add more dynamism and entrepreneurship to the economy. They don't damage capitalism and the free market, they make it stronger.

 

[Dice//]

Basic income is a dead end and millenials and Gen Z'ers are the wall at the end of the alley. Millenials shouldn't buy avocados because they can't afford houses. Gen Z'ers are killing Macy's by not wasting money there. Why isn't this all coming together? *counts money while smoking cigar*

Spoiler

No arguments against (or, unfortunately yet, for) universal basic income is valid until it is properly documented, but American industries resigning themselves to automation without being aware of the impact on workers is woefully idiotic. Without people to pay for anything in your fucking economy you aren't going to get anywhere. Digital bootstraps aren't a thing, you stupid trickling fucks.

Edit: We aren't that far away from the point that robots should effectively we doing all the work while our species reaps all the benefits, but rich shareholding fucks won't just let that be enough and will seek to enslave humanity for the sake of their dividends.

I suggest we preemptively guillotine them.

Indeed. More than anything is that automation is seriously ignored. It will be the future, no promise of coal jobs will change that.

I'm worried by the time something is considered it won't be too little too late.

 

[commedieu]

Don't we have data. From.other nations that experiment with this?

 

[Froyo Love]

First sentence of the article:

The concept of an unconditional basic income is becoming increasingly popular among economists, managers, activists, and entrepreneurs as an alternative to traditional social policy.

Nowhere in the article: analysis from those perspectives. Which is interesting, because the author is a political economist but says nothing in this piece from her discipline. Instead she makes the curious argument that giving the poor resources would make people less concerned about giving the poor resources so it's really a bad idea to give them resources.

 

[Bronx-Man]

Smells like the bourgeoisie wrote this

 

[makingmusic476]

These are weak, unevidenced arguments.

"Why work if you get free money?" Because working will give you money in addition to that money.

Also, the author's argument that it hinders social mobility is poor. They don't consider the fact that many would no longer be forced to suffer through dead end jobs that monopolize the time and energy they have to work towards something better simply to survive.

 

[Joeku]

Indeed. More than anything is that automation is seriously ignored. It will be the future, no promise of coal jobs will change that.

I'm worried by the time something is considered it won't be too little too late.

That's not a worry, that's a reality. The anglosphere has fallen into idocy and anti-intellectualism, and so we are now stupid and will cook the atmosphere instead of preserve it.

Honestly, right now, if western society wanted to, we could produce enough automated machines and convert to clean energy such that the entire world could be golden. But that would mean we'd have to become profit-negative, and that's not okay.

Edit:

Smells like someone who's ready for the guillotine wrote this

FTFY

 

[Tylercrat]

I very much disagree with the article. As someone in the lower class, I would not stop working if the government gave me $10,000 a year. Why would I stop working to live on $10,000 a year? That's poverty money. Most people try to escape poverty.

Secondly, it would not be that expensive. It would would not be nearly as expensive as the Berniecare plan (I'm talking about socialized medicine which I think is not really worth the cost.) Though it would cost slightly more expensive than Obamacare (a big expansion of medicaid and cost subsidies). If Democrats could scratch together enough money for Obamacare (like 900 billion a year), then I'm pretty sure they could fund a basic income to get all the homeless off the streets.

The reason why it is not politically popular is that the middle class doesn't gain anything from it. America doesn't usually do programs that helps the lower class specifically. So a basic income is fantasy of mine. But I am really hoping one of the like 22 people running for the democratic nomination in 2020 will come out in favor of it.

 

[GCX]

Don't we have data. From.other nations that experiment with this?

Finland is currently running a basic income test with several thousand participants. There will probably be a pretty deep analysis based on the results at some point.

 

[sphagnum]

Basic income is the last possible way for capitalism to save itself. It's far superior to just....not doing it, but it still doesn't address the fundamental issue underlying the problem: who controls the means of production? The reason we would need basic income is because otherwise we will have a society where the bourgeoisie controls the machines and everyone else would otherwise starve since jobs are rendered meaningless in an automated future. Basic income without transforming the concept of property rights is only a bandaid. Basic income exists to spread a little bit of the wealth but not hand over the purse. It's a more egalitarian form of bread and circuses. It does not solve the class conflict.

The solution is socialism.

 

[LinkAndEpona]

How does UBI help the unemployed or anyone really when cost of living prices would also increase just as much due to inflation?

 

[Joeku]

Hey I found the song that comes at the natural conclusion of Western capitalism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrPrr4wmnJ4

 

[wutwutwut]

How does UBI help the unemployed or anyone really when cost of living prices would also increase just as much due to inflation?

How does the minimum wage help?

 

[wutwutwut]

Given that there are going to be fewer jobs in the future than people needed to do them (which is arguable, but assuming this...) there's no way we can retain capitalism in any form without severe redistribution.

 

[commedieu]

How does UBI help the unemployed or anyone really when cost of living prices would also increase just as much due to inflation?

It helps them because they'd have a basic income for upward mobility. Versus not having basic income for upward mobility.

People want to live a good life. Some don't have the chance. Some want to give up, but that would be their choice to stay out of the workforce.

In the usa. We waste billions, in military projects and failed systems. If that money was funneled into basic income, I wouldn't notice a difference to my taxes, and it would help more people than harm. People will mooch, but it will probably be less than government waste. Re.mai hard earned monies..

The system right now is broken. 10ish people shouldn't own the world's wealth, and have absolute poverty for millions of people. Hell, most Americans currently are at or near poverty. It's 40/45%?

The time is coming to stop looking out for the nobility and rich folks, and start supporting each other.

 

[Pizza]

If you suddenly just wiped out all technology and "progress" humans would figure out how to hunt/gather and shit

Because the planet provides the basic necessities.

Once you hide the basic necessities behind a paywall and forbid anyone from living off the land, it seems incredibly unreasonable that people can just... flounder like they do.

Why do we all pay taxes to go fight wars we don't ask to be involved in? Our government mostly doesn't even know how big all our secret redundant shit actually is.

We (he govt) can afford for frivolous shit but you HAVE to participate in the progress machine to survive. And if you get sick that's on you too.

In 2017 reasonable/safe living condition, food, CLEAN water, equal rights/respect, and healthcare should all be things we just take for granted as being a part of a technologically advanced society, and our excursions into foreign countries should be humanitarian efforts.

But that's not good for the bottom line.

 

[Froyo Love]

How does UBI help the unemployed or anyone really when cost of living prices would also increase just as much due to inflation?

That's not what inflation is. Government food stamps don't make food cost more, they're a payment from an existing fund.

 

[Trouble]

Flawed argument that doesn't account for the rising effects of automation. No amount of pressure will help the poor and long-term unemployed when there aren't enough jobs for everyone.

 

[BarringGaffner]

This seems to be written without factoring in that most people will not be able to have a job in our lifetime.

The amount of drivers that will lose their jobs in the next 20 years is enough to cause a revolution if they don't actually figure out a plan. There are no software engineer jobs out there for truckers.

 

[Brinbe]

What fucking horseshit that is. Jesus Christo. Make that author live on 10 K a year and see if he will believe his own awful argument.

 

[AYF 001]

It is a solution, just not in the fantasy land where the middle class can continue to live their unsustainable lifestyles without consequences.

 

[Tylercrat]

This seems to be written without factoring in that most people will not be able to have a job in our lifetime.

The amount of drivers that will lose their jobs in the next 20 years is enough to cause a revolution if they don't actually figure out a plan. There are no software engineer jobs out there for truckers.

15 years from now, when all the truckers lose their jobs from automation, there is going to be a political firestorm like no other. A basic income is absolutely coming someday. The question is when.

 

[Foffy]

The "unpleasant task of looking for employment" seems to miss one of the greatest failures of society today: the unpleasant task of having employment in precarious and/or worthless efforts. The author directly ignores some of the direct, present problems of the precariat classes in the world today, where she is dipshitted enough any employment, however wasteful, however stressful, is better than an assured floor. As if people who have floors don't engage in self-actualization or are empowered, as has been the case of the last three decades of studies. Bonus points for being stupid enough to ignore the problem of labor wage decoupling via automation too. Let's assume that's not a thing...

One of the most infuriating things about anti-UBI arguments today is they're just like this. All rhetoric and no fucking substance. The best argument you can make against it is would it be enough to support people in a system collapsing, or is it collapsing so hard this solution is insoluble. Instead we get gutter trash like this.

Hassel's written this empty trite before.

 

[SomeRandomWeirdGuy]

With automation on the horizon, I really only see two possible outcomes. Even more profound inequality leading to an eventual revolution against the elite, or a world with a universal income.

People are so brainwashed by the idea that you need a job to have worth, that they are against a universal income. My mom, a mostly progressive woman, can't comprehend an existence without a job. At the same time obviously, she also is set against any sort of retraining if her job were to be made obsolete.

It's just a tough hurdle to climb, but I honestly don't see a happy ending for humanity if we don't go toward UBI

 

[Sub Boss]

They don't give a shit that the jobs are dissapearing

 

[Foffy]

They don't give a shit that the jobs are dissapearing

I would imagine her answer, assuming she's the same woman I am thinking of, is job guarantees.

You know, doubling down on everything wrong with a jobs cult culture. Solidifying the dualities of "real" and "unreal" work, keeping the notion of "bullshit jobs," potentially hampering innovation and technological advancement because it "rocks the boat of stable employment."

Reality may be forcibly breaking that last one, but society sure seems hellbent on keeping the first two as it allows its own curated noose to hang itself from.

 

[Poltergust]

For the poor and long-term unemployed, basic income would remove the pressure to find work and the unpleasant task of actively look for employment.

Isn't the whole point of basic income existing is that there is literally not enough work to go around?

 

[Sub Boss]

It will work in culturally homogeneous societies with small populations and energy independence, whereas it will distort if not eliminate democracy in larger ones like the US as its sustainability would become a matter of national security.

The #1 priority for a stable future is reduction in population count, which will lower the cost of BI and increase the standard of living it would provide, as well as reaching energy independence which also reduces said cost and can lead to self-sufficiency.


Also more free time means more flat-earthers and conspiracy theorists, mental illness, and so on. Again, this would be an issue in the US and would contribute to move the US towards a post-democracy society.

Yeah...

This is fucked up.

 

[Biske]

I happen to think the money we throw away on never ending wars and corporate welfare is a dead end.

But yeah fuck us.

We are just a bunch of dumb cunts


Keep taking our money and spending it how you see fit giant companies, may we all bask in your golden trickle down




Can't wait for the looming future our governments refuse to acknowledge and plan for bites us in the ass.

Good luck with your blind consumerism then.

 

[The Technomancer]

I mean

It is literally going to be the only option

We are going to reach a point where 25% of the population is unemployed

You can't just tell those people they don't get to eat

 

[soco]

I'm not convinced basic income is the answer, but if things continue on this trend, we're gonna need some solution. We have far too many people on the planet, and most are in jobs that will likely disappear in the next 50-80 years. Even if you buy the argument of the gig economy, we're not going to have enough gigs to support people.

 

[IndoAssassin]

Right leaning countries think basic income is going to destroy their country. Left/centre leaning countries think BI is the saving grace of their future. What else is new.

 

[Joeku]

I'm not convinced basic income is the answer, but if things continue on this trend, we're gonna need some solution. We have far too many people on the planet, and most are in jobs that will likely disappear in the next 50-80 years. Even if you buy the argument of the gig economy, we're not going to have enough gigs to support people.

If you don't think UBI is the answer, what is? And how is that not just interim before a universal income?

 

[B-Dubs]

I'm not convinced basic income is the answer, but if things continue on this trend, we're gonna need some solution. We have far too many people on the planet, and most are in jobs that will likely disappear in the next 50-80 years. Even if you buy the argument of the gig economy, we're not going to have enough gigs to support people.

Hell, you can't support yourself on the "gig economy" now. It's literally just a marketing term, like the "sharing economy," to hide the fact that such a thing already existed and no one really liked it and it's just been wrapped in shiny new tech.

 

[Oppo]

"This is a poisonous idea", said the snake, bereft of mincome data.

We'll have more results from Ontario soon, i suspect adding to the positive outcomes of the other Canadian and overseas trials.

 

[Imperfected]

I mean

It is literally going to be the only option

We are going to reach a point where 25% of the population is unemployed

You can't just tell those people they don't get to eat

I mean, you can, but then they just murder you. It's been attempted.

 

[sphagnum]

I'm really interested in seeing how long white working class truckers will be duped into blaming Mexicans and blacks and (((globalists))) once their jobs are gone so that their anger is deflected away from the bourgeoisie. The GOP will portray UBI as the PATH TO COMMUNISM!!! so you know its going to be ardently opposed at first.

Will automation finally be the thing that makes white workers realize who their real enemy is?

 

[Foffy]

By the by, I'd like to drop some actual knowledge here, seeing as the article had none.

First, per usual, we should be reminded that a UBI already exists, but it's for the real parasites: the 1%.

Second, if one wants data on studies, I would suggest looking up the Manitoba study, or following the work of Guy Standing, who has studied this topic for over 30 years. He's also overseen almost every major pilot on Earth; for example, he's overseen the Oakland, California pilot, written a book about his trials in India, which the country may go national with, and has written deeply on the topic of the rise of a precariat class due to the failure of economic systems the world over. He warned six years ago these problems would create a "neoliberal monster," and as many of GAF users are in America, you don't have to look far to find the orange demon.

Finally, if I can offer studies and trials to follow, I'll just name a few. Finland and Ontario are doing studies at basic income levels slight above the suggested amounts, there's the Oakland study I mentioned earlier, and GiveDirectly is doing trials in Africa. In fact, former Obama white house staff are involved with GiveDirectly, but this is because they're likely aware of what's going to happen to America with automation and technological precarity: we think the doom comes when a job is lost in full. Insolubility arises when your tasks and hours, thus your marketable skills and return in income, start to be delegated away from you. This is an enormous looming problem, and I would implore all of you to not be as fucking stupid as Hassel by acting like this isn't a core issue and one of the central reasons a new model is even being suggested.

I'm not convinced basic income is the answer, but if things continue on this trend, we're gonna need some solution. We have far too many people on the planet, and most are in jobs that will likely disappear in the next 50-80 years. Even if you buy the argument of the gig economy, we're not going to have enough gigs to support people.

Not to shit on you, but people like Steve Mnuchin think this.

He's a laughing stock to people studying this problem.

Cut those bolded numbers in half. We may see the most employed occupation in the US vanish before 2030. Coal is falling apart 25 years ahead of schedule, so the dominos of change fall fast.