Universal Basic Income: A Case Study
Is really a good idea?
Who came up with this idea?
The most basic idea of a universal income from the government has its beginning in the sixteenth century, when Sir Thomas More wrote in his book Utopia that all people should receive a guaranteed income.
But this idea was not taken to politics until the 60s, when the US President, Richard Nixon, expressed the intention of implementing a similar idea. Since then, a whole movement has been created for and against the UBI.
Today the greatest exponents of this idea are Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, for example Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. These argue that the progressive automation of industries will lead to a massive loss of work for people, who will need a livelihood in order to survive. The supporters of this policy also ensure that when this idea is implemented it will lead to people continuing to develop and looking for work. That is, they will not stay on their couch while they receive free money from the government.
Inconveniences
On the other hand, there are people who think it is impossible to implement it.
And this has several justifications:
Who decides how much money give to each person?
It is a question with a very high level of complexity since it is very difficult to determine how much money is needed to live (or survive) in different cities. For example, to have a normal life in San Francisco, you need much more money than to have exactly the same habits as inq San Antonio, Texas. And this leads to inequality, because not all the population will receive the same amount of money, for some it will be enough and for others it will not.
It’s simply too much money
This would have as a consequence a significant increase in taxes on goods and services to be able to pay for it. That is to say that money enters an infinite cycle where it leaves the taxpayer’s pocket to go to the coffers of the State and vice versa.
And not only it’s a matter of money
But it also has to do with ethics. Many people argue that millionaires don’t mind paying more taxes, but anyway it is not right not to treat everyone in the same way. It goes against any objective idea of justice to force the richest people to “pay a salary” to the rest of society.
Alternatives
I’ve been thinking about alternatives to the Universal Basic Income for several days now and I was able to come up with some more practical ideas:
Vouchers or subsidies
Instead of the State delivering a fixed monthly amount, because it does not pay for a part of the most basic and necessary services and goods such as food, education and health.
For example, if you want to have a certain education or health, the State will pay a percentage so that the final price is not so high, this will allow you to have access to better quality services than we would normally get. Although it can also lead to inflate prices in an exaggerated way.
Lower taxes
Instead of entering the infinite loop between you and the State that I explained before, why not lower taxes and leave a little more money in the taxpayer’s bank accounts.
This will allow access to cheaper goods and services so we will have more money to spend on other things.
Conclusion
A few years ago, when this debate became very popular in Switzerland, I also thought it was an excellent idea.
I saw it from the point of view of the beneficiary, because after all who does not want to receive money for the only merit of existing?
But after seeing this question from a more technical point of view, it’s an untenable idea in the long term. Of course it is a very noble idea and with the best intention, but it isn’t the most practical.
