[someguywithanm3]

Do you think it would work? Let's say we gave everyone $1000 or $2000 a month. Would it just cause prices of goods and services to skyrocket?

I'm trying to see what you think without getting politics involved.

[ASAP]

I think two things would happen-

1) You would see a noticeable inflation but more importantly...

2) Your cost of simple labor would go up astronomically... whether it be coffee pourers or whatever... basically anyone that can have $2k for free has 0 incentive to work unless let's say they make $2.5 to $3k... are you aware of how destructive that would be to the economy? Educated nurses sometimes don't make $3k a month...

[roastbeef]

stupid. money flows out of most people's hands like water pours into sand. everything would just get inflated a tiny bit to recoup the costs.

[chassis]

I don't know if it would work. What motivates the question?

[Darth One]

I agree with this, and volunteer to be in charge. I’ll disburse $2k a month to each American household, and keep the rest of the US GDP

[kscarrol]

Generally the idea of universal income is to simply provide monthly income and remove other forms of support like welfare. Real questions are does every citizen receive the monthly income? In that case yes I see more money driving demand for goods/services ultimately driving up inflation. If this is solely for lower income folks/those living below the poverty line I don't see a huge impact as the monthly stipend is offset by the loss of other governmental benefits.

[chetrickerman]

Two reasons why it wont work, Greed and Envy

[DETRoadster]

Originally Posted by chassis

I don't know if it would work. What motivates the question?

You don't really follow politics, do you?

A candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination for 2020 is campaigning on this.

[Banana Hammock]

This would work in theory if people pulled their own weight and contributed to society.

I don't think this would work because I have no faith in humanity.

[RickFLM4]

Yes it will work fine to buy some votes.

“without getting politics involved.”

[N54Yankee]

There’s an ancient phrase that explains it in a nut shell and is as true today as it was then. “Robbing Peter to pay Paul”

[chassis]

What is required of the recipient in exchange for universal income?

[NemesisX]

"$1000 to $2000 per month" is way too much because it dis-incentivizes too many middle class jobs.

Suppose universal basic income was something like $600 to $700 per month. Enough to pay for part of rent or food (all of it) or part of transportation, but not all 3 simultaneously.

Suppose 90% of people decided to use UBI on rent and/or housing. Demand would go up, rent would go up, and effectively what would end up happening is this universal basic income would end up being a government funded (and therefore taxpayer funded) payout to those who own and control real estate.

In the long term this wouldn't be a subsidy because subsidies by definition reduce the cost of a good for the consumer. There are not enough affordable housing units to accommodate all of the homeless population in the United States. Therefore, the cost to rent an apartment (and to a lesser extent housing prices) would necessarily go up in the long term.

I think this is plausible because rent/house payments tend to constitute a person's biggest monthly expenditure.

[hubbahubba]

This sums it up pretty well:

"Friend, you cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. And what one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government can't give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody. And when half of the people get the idea they don't have to work because the other half's going to take care of them, and when the other half get the idea it does no good to work because somebody's going to get what I work for. That, dear friend, is about the end of any nation."
-Adrian Rogers

[RogHer]

Originally Posted by someguywithanm3

Do you think it would work? Let's say we gave everyone $1000 or $2000 a month. Would it just cause prices of goods and services to skyrocket?

I'm trying to see what you think without getting politics involved.

No.

Some countries have trialed it. Never worked.

[heatwave]

It sounds interesting to me. Never heard about it before. I play new games online games mostly. The best part is that I can win money while playing, that's convy. Want to become a pro gmer.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by heatwave

It sounds interesting to me. Never heard about it before

It's an important component of the FairTax system.

https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works

[Germanauto]

It's a stupid idea because the psychology behind it is fundamentally flawed.

It's counting on people to use that money wisely.

Look at all the data on metrics like credit card debt, auto loans, drug/alcohol expenditures, etc. Most Americans, especially poorly educated ones, won't save and invest that money wisely. They'll blow it on Jordans, weed, booze, and McDonalds. Most of my patients are on Medicaid and/or welfare and use their money to eat like shit, smoke cigarettes, and drink 20 beers in a sitting. My tax dollars are funding it.

Human beings inherently crave instant gratification over delayed gratification. This has been well researched. Give people free money and it'll be a disaster.

[eluded]

Free income for all

Healthcare for all

Education Debt forgiveness for all

[Darth One]

I’m telling you guys, i’m the right person to run this. I’ll get you your checks on time (might have to stand in line for them, but that should be no problem) and i’ll do a good job controlling the rest of US GDP.

And just so no one thinks that I think i’m better than all of you because of my job, we’ll all call each other ‘comrade’ so that we are clear that we’re equals.

[spazzyfry123]

Instead of free money, why not guaranteed jobs?

Oh right, that was Frank Underwood.

[Buckeye///M]

I believe this was trialed in Finland a couple years ago and the results were inconclusive. Positive impact on health and stress (ya, I would have less stress if I didn’t have to work) but no impact on employment.