some Oakland residents will receive 'Basic Income'- lump sum money w/o working for it

[JEDI]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/31/tec...nd-pilot/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_tech_pool

People get a lump sum of money ($1k - $2k per month) on a regular basis to cover the cost of rent and food without needing to work for it.

Silicon Valley organization, Y Combinator, footing the bill.

long-term study on what people do -- and how they feel -- when their basic expenses are covered.

Y Combinator wants to study what people of various economic backgrounds do with that financial freedom. Do they sit around all day watching Netflix and playing video games -- or will they start businesses? Will they be happy?


Im thinking w/o educating these recipients on how to be productive citizens of the US, they'll be sitting around all day watching Netflix and playing video games

 

[compuwiz1]

Yay for Oakland....more crack and 40's.

 

[Jhhnn]

So... It's kinda like having a trust fund?

 

[Victorian Gray]

And Finland and Holland are starting pilot projects

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-europe-set-to-pilot-universal-basic-incomes

and The province of Ontario is starting a pilot project this fall

http://www.basicincome.org/news/2016/04/canada-ontario-is-ready-to-test-a-basic-income/

and an article on the small test in Manitoba back in the 70s

"Between 1974 and 1979, residents of a small Manitoba city were selected to be subjects in a project that ensured basic annual incomes for everyone. For five years, monthly cheques were delivered to the poorest residents of Dauphin, Man. – no strings attached.

And for five years, poverty was completely eliminated.

The program was dubbed “Mincome” – a neologism of “minimum income” – and it was the first of its kind in North America. It stood out from similar American projects at the time because it didn’t shut out seniors and the disabled from qualification.

The project’s original intent was to evaluate if giving cheques to the working poor, enough to top-up their incomes to a living wage, would kill people’s motivation to work. It didn’t."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/23/mincome-in-dauphin-manitoba_n_6335682.html

I suspect there will be a lot more experimenting done on the idea over the next few years.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Were any studies done on the Manitoba experiment? The only article I could find mentions that total work hours for teens and single mothers decreased, meaning that fewer teens felt the pressure to drop out of school out of necessity to help support their families. It doesn't seem like they ran the program long enough to determine long term impacts to labor behaviors.

What complementary programs would also be necessary in a city like Oakland where drug use is also prevalent.

How is this different than welfare? Don't low income housing and food stamps already provide this minimum threshold safety net, or is the idea more of making the safety net feel more secure?

It seems to have some merit. I believe some European nations see such programs as potentially alleviating the conditions favorable to ISIS recruitment.

 

[Victorian Gray]

The federal Conservative govt. ended the experiment in 1978 as they had no interest in promoting the concept. As for the actual study papers from the time not sure where you'd find info on those. If you live near a good library they might be able to help find information on the study.

I did find this video of a talk on the experiment from a 2014 conference (43 min.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9-sDDvKR8g

This article goes into a fair bit of depth as well

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-mincome-experiment-dauphin

Were any studies done on the Manitoba experiment? The only article I could find mentions that total work hours for teens and single mothers decreased, meaning that fewer teens felt the pressure to drop out of school out of necessity to help support their families. It doesn't seem like they ran the program long enough to determine long term impacts to labor behaviors.

What complementary programs would also be necessary in a city like Oakland where drug use is also prevalent.

How is this different than welfare? Don't low income housing and food stamps already provide this minimum threshold safety net, or is the idea more of making the safety net feel more secure?

It seems to have some merit. I believe some European nations see such programs as potentially alleviating the conditions favorable to ISIS recruitment.

 

[flexy]

Im thinking w/o educating these recipients on how to be productive citizens of the US, they'll be sitting around all day watching Netflix and playing video games

Your short-sightedness is...amazing...

There will ALWAYS be the unemployed. There will ALWAYS be people on welfare.

Abandoning the immense bureaucracy behind this (SS, health insurance, welfare, unemployment etc.) and INSTEAD give the people a basic income TO COVER BASIC ESSENTIALS is very smart. For starters, it gives people an incentive to work since there is no "fear" anymore to lose benefits by taking on work.
Whether you like it or not, if someone gets welfare/unemployment and the amount he/she is getting the same as if he were working as a burger flipper....this is legit concern. Whether this is right, morally, let's have this question out. Obviously YOU would be "happier" if people flip burgers, rather than receive welfare and merely watching Netflix all-day-long. But this doesn't change the facts.

The idea behind basic income is to motivate people to work and to reduce bureaucracy, it's not giving away "free money" if people would receive whatever benefits anyway.

 

[motsm]

Your short-sightedness is...amazing...

There will ALWAYS be the unemployed. There will ALWAYS be people on welfare.

Abandoning the immense bureaucracy behind this (SS, health insurance, welfare, unemployment etc.) and INSTEAD give the people a basic income TO COVER BASIC ESSENTIALS is very smart. For starters, it gives people an incentive to work since there is no "fear" anymore to lose benefits by taking on work.
Whether you like it or not, if someone gets welfare/unemployment and the amount he/she is getting the same as if he were working as a burger flipper....this is legit concern. Whether this is right, morally, let's have this question out. Obviously YOU would be "happier" if people flip burgers, rather than receive welfare and merely watching Netflix all-day-long. But this doesn't change the facts.

The idea behind basic income is to motivate people to work and to reduce bureaucracy, it's not giving away "free money" if people would receive whatever benefits anyway.

Whats amazing is that you went on this ridiculous tirade, based on his rather innocuous comment.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Whats amazing is that you went on this ridiculous tirade, based on his rather innocuous comment.

It's not really all that innocuous. It shows a marked disdain for the poor and a lack of understanding of what life is really like for most poor folks. The vast majority of them work far harder than, I suspect, most, if not all, of the folks in this forum.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm all for trying it out maybe it does work. I doubt it but why not try it out. I will say an opt in survey will never yield accurate results because anyone who has more won't opt in, nor the mentally insane, nor the mentally disabled, nor a heavy drinker or addict.

 

[compuwiz1]

It's not really all that innocuous. It shows a marked disdain for the poor and a lack of understanding of what life is really like for most poor folks. The vast majority of them work far harder than, I suspect, most, if not all, of the folks in this forum.

Have you ever driven through Oakland, I mean some of the neighborhoods? I have. 30-40 year old men are out in the middle of the day, drinking in public, smoking who knows what, sitting on porches and playing cards, while kids in loaded diapers are running all over the place and the moms, I assume, must be out working, trying to support these POS excuses for men. Poor is one thing, unemployable is another, but for some of those, it's self inflicted, brought on by the choices they make. The mentality of the situation must be addressed. Trust me, most of these guys I just described are fine doing what they're doing. They are financially better off running their games,drugs, hookers and letting mom work, than getting out and trying to make something of themselves. Escalades and Navigators riding on 24's abound. Don't believe it, go take a look, but be careful!

 

[JEDI]

How is this different than welfare? Don't low income housing and food stamps already provide this minimum threshold safety net, or is the idea more of making the safety net feel more secure?

w/welfare and food stamps, you get kicked out of the program if you make too much $.
so by trying to succeed and be a productive citizen, you get punished.

with the Oakland study, your free $ doesn't get taken away if you make more $.

 

[JEDI]

Whats amazing is that you went on this ridiculous tirade, based on his rather innocuous comment.

yup.
why go off the deep end flexy?

 

[MajinCry]

Anecdotes to hate the poor. Oh lordy.

I'm curious how this would fare on the reservations, seeing as how there are no jobs, hospitals, emergency services, schools, etc. Might actually give them a shot at buying food that isn't from a sketchy dollar store, and allowing them to pool money to construct services.

 

[Paratus]

As Starbuck alluded to they tried this in Manitoba back in the 70's. Besides small reductions in work hours for teens and new mothers they also saw a statistically significant drop in emergency room visits and mental health problems.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome

University of Manitoba economist Evelyn Forget (/fɔːrˈʒeɪ/) conducted an analysis of the Dauphin portion of the experiment in 2009 which was published in 2011.[7][8] She found that only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less. Mothers with newborns stopped working because they wanted to stay at home longer with their babies, and teenagers worked less because they weren't under as much pressure to support their families, which resulted in more teenagers graduating. In addition, those who continued to work were given more opportunities to choose what type of work they did. Forget found that in the period that Mincome was administered, hospital visits dropped 8.5 percent, with fewer incidents of work-related injuries, and fewer emergency room visits from accidents and injuries.[9] Additionally, the period saw a reduction in rates of psychiatric hospitalization, and in the number of mental illness-related consultations with health professionals.[10][11]

Looks like there's the possibility of some significant benefits. I'd say more study is in order.

 

[Mai72]

COMFORT IS THE ENEMY OF SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT!

If someone is giving you money for doing nothing, the chance that you'll aspire to be something greatly diminishes. Unless you naturally crave success, you'll take the easy road. Why? Because your needs are being met. It's very common for people to get the essentials covered and just give up. They never strive for anything greater. They don't have too!

IMO, it's better to have something that motivates you to do better. Relying on company generosity and government subsidies is not the answer! What's going to happen when the money dries up and there is no more to give out? What happens when the government says "opps. we're $50 Trillion is debt. We need to slash public assistance." I'd rather be self dependent than depend on anyone.

Mark my words. One day in the near future when our economy tanks hard, the people who are getting public assistance are going to be screwed.

 

[JEDI]

COMFORT IS THE ENEMY OF SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT!

If someone is giving you money for doing nothing, the chance that you'll aspire to be something greatly diminishes. Unless you naturally crave success, you'll take the easy road. Why? Because your needs are being met. It's very common for people to get the essentials covered and just give up. They never strive for anything greater. They don't have too!

IMO, it's better to have something that motivates you to do better. Relying on company generosity and government subsidies is not the answer! What's going to happen when the money dries up and there is no more to give out? What happens when the government says "opps. we're $50 Trillion is debt. We need to slash public assistance." I'd rather be self dependent than depend on anyone.

Mark my words. One day in the near future when our economy tanks hard, the people who are getting public assistance are going to be screwed.

:thumbsup: on everything he said

 

[yllus]

:thumbsup: on everything he said

It's a very simplistic view. People don't work for a number of reasons. I think it'd be interesting to see what comes of this experiment.

 

[Jaskalas]

Have you ever driven through Oakland, I mean some of the neighborhoods?

Basic income, first pass is to set it at $12,000 a year.

The state with the highest total value of welfare benefits was Hawaii, at $49,175. The lowest was Mississippi, at $16,984.

Sounds like all those people sitting around in Oakland will be getting a paycut, and pure benefit from employment instead of the harm it does to their benefits today.

 

[soulcougher73]

I'll go with the path of least resistance as their final answer.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

COMFORT IS THE ENEMY OF SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT!

If someone is giving you money for doing nothing, the chance that you'll aspire to be something greatly diminishes. Unless you naturally crave success, you'll take the easy road. Why? Because your needs are being met. It's very common for people to get the essentials covered and just give up. They never strive for anything greater. They don't have too!

IMO, it's better to have something that motivates you to do better. Relying on company generosity and government subsidies is not the answer! What's going to happen when the money dries up and there is no more to give out? What happens when the government says "opps. we're $50 Trillion is debt. We need to slash public assistance." I'd rather be self dependent than depend on anyone.

Mark my words. One day in the near future when our economy tanks hard, the people who are getting public assistance are going to be screwed.

This.

Path of Least Resistance... It's not just in science.

 

[Jhhnn]

Basic income, first pass is to set it at $12,000 a year.

The state with the highest total value of welfare benefits was Hawaii, at $49,175. The lowest was Mississippi, at $16,984.

Sounds like all those people sitting around in Oakland will be getting a paycut, and pure benefit from employment instead of the harm it does to their benefits today.

What a nasty characterization of the un- & under employed. It oozes undeserved self righteousness.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Yay for Oakland....more crack and 40's.

Trickle down economics. Support the crack dealers and you stimulate the sales of Cadillac SUVs. Buy more '40s and the bodega owners can afford to take their families to Disneyland. It works!

Please be more careful and circumspect, both of you. Despite your post #32 "explanation", both of your posts read as supporting the worst of racist stereotypes, and are likely to be infracted if repeated.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[JSt0rm]

Trickle down economics. Support the crack dealers and you stimulate the sales of Cadillac SUVs. Buy more '40s and the bodega owners can afford to take their families to Disneyland. It works!

Could you fit any more anti-black in this sentence?

 

[Jhhnn]

Could you fit any more anti-black in this sentence?

Well, it's not racist if you don't say the n-word*. Not in outer Glenbeckistan, anyway.

He must think that poor white Republicans in Appalachia act differently than their black counterparts in Oakland.

*I understand your intent, but please don't use special characters to defeat our word filter. In this case, use the bolded instead.

Perknose
Forum Director