You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Hi Steemit! Scott Santens here. If you've ever googled "basic income", you may have read something I've written.
But which example is most likely to lead to better adults decades later? The one where everyone was raised by someone else other than their parent? Or the one where everyone was raised by their parent?
This sort of is one of the questions I have re GBI and that is who gets to make the decision to stay home or not?
I don't doubt that there will be a paradigm shift needed, it's just who is the one that's going to make decisions. If it is each individual without strings attached, sign me up.
SDG
It's no different from now, it's just that the incentives (both tangible and intangible) will be rearranged a bit. I could ask the same question about the current system: Who gets to make the decision to stay home or not? The individual does, of course. They weigh up the pros and cons and incentives and disincentives and make an informed choice (if they're lucky). And not to forget that the more precarious your existence is, the less real choice you have in the employment (and otherwise) marketplace. Giving everyone a liveable minimum wage means that people are actually freer to make real choices about how they allocate their time and resources.
I'm sorry, but $1,000/month is not a "liveable" wage in San Fransico, California - although it might be in rural Nebraska. Placing an artificial, sub-poverty income limit on all people is not "freedom," it's just a softer form of slavery than we have right now, but it is slavery nonetheless.
Basic income is not meant to be a complete replacement for income. Tell me if, for those working in San Francisco, a $12,000/yr or $1,000/mo increase in their after tax income would make a difference in their lives?
As far as cost of living differences, Scott address that concern in one of his articles.