Theres probably lots of well thought arguments for basic income guarantee but here's the things I could come up with:
- much cheaper than welfare because you don't need to hire people who decide if you deserve it
- less corruption than welfare because you can't bribe people who decide whether you deserve it.
- you don't have to hide that you are working in order not to loose the benefit, so possibly more money from taxes and healthier, more honest social climate. Also no need for minimum wage.
- no need for government sponsored pension or formalized retirement age
- you no longer have to care so much about unemployment. From political issue it becomes only yet another indicator of the state of economy. Hence the government can safely shed off large quantities of its employees.
- no need for minimum wage, wages can safely drop below any currently conceivable minimums.
- more worker mobility since you don't have your whole income at stake when you decide to look for new job.
- strong incentive for having kids since they add to family income, also parents have sense of security that they will be able to support a child and have time to raise it as well.
- more money in hands of more careful consumers. Poor people tend to spend money more wisely as they choose products more carefully with regards to ratio between price and quality. More purchasing power in hands of dedicated consumers, results in more efficient market.
>> - you no longer have to care so much about unemployment. From political issue it becomes only yet another indicator of the state of economy. Hence the government can safely shed off large quantities of its employees.
i.e. the slide to a welfare-dependent state where people don't feel the need to work for their luxuries and economic stagnation
>> - strong incentive for having kids since they add to family income, also parents have sense of security that they will be able to support a child and have time to raise it as well.
> i.e. the slide to a welfare-dependent state where people don't feel the need to work for their luxuries and economic stagnation
That's the main counterpoint to the basic income guarantee. If people are no longer afraid that they starve or die of cold or heat on the street they won't work. Funny thing is that same people that voice this concern usually think that working is usual way how the people fulfill their higher needs (belonging, esteem, self-actualization).
> At 7bn, I'm not sure more kids is the answer.
There is a strong fear in many rich countries that their original populations that are currently growing old will eventually die out and be replaced by immigrants.
Personally I'm not against population growth. Having more educated kids in rich countries might be beneficial.
- much cheaper than welfare because you don't need to hire people who decide if you deserve it
- less corruption than welfare because you can't bribe people who decide whether you deserve it.
- you don't have to hide that you are working in order not to loose the benefit, so possibly more money from taxes and healthier, more honest social climate. Also no need for minimum wage.
- no need for government sponsored pension or formalized retirement age
- you no longer have to care so much about unemployment. From political issue it becomes only yet another indicator of the state of economy. Hence the government can safely shed off large quantities of its employees.
- no need for minimum wage, wages can safely drop below any currently conceivable minimums.
- more worker mobility since you don't have your whole income at stake when you decide to look for new job.
- strong incentive for having kids since they add to family income, also parents have sense of security that they will be able to support a child and have time to raise it as well.
- more money in hands of more careful consumers. Poor people tend to spend money more wisely as they choose products more carefully with regards to ratio between price and quality. More purchasing power in hands of dedicated consumers, results in more efficient market.