0
0

Is basic income bad economics? (self.badeconomics)

TrickyDickNixonbotMarx was right!!11 が 投稿

Its a Reddit favourite ive noticed, and there seems to be a lot of hype on both the left and right about the idea. I myself am actually quite fond of it, although I wouldnt consider myself a convert just yet. However, i've also noticed there are occasional jabs at it around here, and im interested if this is just in good fun, or if there are some serious economic issues being overlooked by the naked economically untrained eye?

全 10 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]_Rory_T.K. Whitaker's Ghost 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

Questions should be directed to the Sticky Threads, not individual posts.

Read the sidebar, Rule IV.

Also, try the search function first in future: https://np.reddit.com/r/badeconomics/comments/2twaoe/is_a_basic_income_badeconomics_no_not_really_but/

[–]CatFortune 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

/u/wumbotarian- If you're not going to delete threads that violate Rule IV, maybe adding a link flair next to violating threads so people don't follow their example would be a help.

[–]gorbachev 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

In addition to this, I'd add that basic income is often proposed as a solution to a "problem" we can't really reasonably think about - namely, what economic policy should prevail post-singularity?

[–]_Pragmatic_idealistHitler was an Austrian 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

I believe that while the idea of basic income is not neccesarily badeconomics, very often advocates in favour of basic income will engage in badeconomics-

[–]guitar_vigilante 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think what people don't realize is how high taxes would have to be for it to happen. And for many people there is sort of a basic income already (welfare), just that the welfare system is not very well organized in the U.S. and could use an overhaul.

[–]brberg 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's not necessarily bad economics, but the stuff you read about it on Reddit is. It's preferable in some ways to the current welfare system, and worse in others. It's not needed to save civilization from otherwise-inevitable downfall. It has significant drawbacks (e.g., it allows able-bodied people to get by without working, although the effects of this are likely minimal if it's small enough). But then, so does the status quo. People talking about a $30,000 UBI are nuts.

[–]Classically_Liberal2Reactionary Shill 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

No but I fail to see how it is superior to an NIT (achieves similar results but costs much less, although contains a bit more work disincentives) or expanded EITC (improves work incentives.)

[–]HealthcareEconomist3Krugman Triggers Me 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

NIT has fewer labor discouragement effects then UBI, fewer people receiving a benefit == fewer people being discouraged.

The UBI systems that /r/BasicIncome talk about are all /be because of their scale too, the inflationary, discouragement and d-cost effects would be more then sufficient to eviscerate growth.

[–]wackyHair 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It might be easier to divided the money into smaller chunks than with a NIT? (monthly vs yearly, for example)

[–]alexhoyerhoard plywood now for our ANCAP overlords 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

A negative income tax is probably better policy, but considering what you see on reddit basic income is far from the worst.