Universal Basic Income

 Once again a guest post to get started.

Nyah Wynne from Facebook

July 19, 2015 at 4:43am

The biggest reason I support UBI (Universal Basic Income) has nothing to do with our possible automated future, as labor becomes less essential, or at least as we need much less of it, though that's a great reason to support it. It's not even about eliminating poverty or making the unemployment rate a non-issue, though those are very good reasons too.

The reason I want a UBI is to make work at least -technically- optional. I want this because so long as work is not optional, so long as it is mandatory, it is coercive. I want UBI so that every low wage worker whose boss screws them on hours, who reprimands them for taking sick days, who asks them to work too fast in unsafe conditions (see the current fast-food lawsuit), every young employee whose boss secretly grabs their ass while no one is looking, who's constantly making lewd comments, or racist comments, or any other sort of hateful bullshit... So that every employee who finds themselves trapped in the fiefdom of some petty little tyrant of a boss, which is actually The Majority Of Low End Workers, so that they can say:

"TAKE THIS JOB AND SHOVE IT"

So that they can really, truly, meaningfully walk the fuck away. And not have it mean they end up on the streets or their kids starve or they find themselves turning tricks to keep the water running and the lights on. Or for that matter just ending up in yet another job with a slightly different petty tyrant. And they can do this, deal with this, without having to deal with lawyers or Union Reps, who though are better than -not- having them it'd be nicer to just be able to do it ourselves. Because if -enough- of them (us) say 'NO' to this petty fucking bullshit, then firms will be forced to stop letting the petty bullshit happen (those who fail to will simply not get workers), and work in general will end up less awful for everyone.

Because the ability to say 'NO' to someone who's actively abusing you... that should be pretty high on the list of 'Liberties' worth defending. In my mind.

 Almost as important is what a mentor at Pan Am called "Fuck You Money" that puts you in a position to as he put it "To do your job right."  If you are dependent on your job for your day to day lifestyle, you can't afford to disagree meaningfully with your bosses to do what is right instead of what is expedient. UBI gives you the safety net along with your Fuck You Money you saved from your productive work to get the next job to use your skills properly.  

 The effect of UBI on workers willing to put up with unreasonable working conditions is probably why the establishment is trying to bury the concept despite its obvious advantages for all except the slave driver bosses.  

  UBI is "outside" money to low income people who spend locally for necessities provided by mainly other low income people. The bodega proprietor, (there would be food trucks on every corner) and other neighborhood business would thrive and economic benefits would trickle UP to landlords, food truck lessors, food truck builders, etc. They might even buy a solar food truck with a Powerwall 2 from Tesla if they are really successful. 

 Entry level jobs and indeed all jobs would be supplemental to UBI and under conventional income tax theory would be taxed progressively.  The big difference would be that entry level jobs would be optional so wages and working conditions must be attractive enough that people would want to work.  Most people would rather be productive, whether as an artisan, an entrepeneur, or as a service worker as long as they feel that they are being useful to their community but they won't do it without reasonable compensation with the UBI as a backup. 

 Creativity is a fundamental drive for humans once they get beyond subsistence.  Cave people drew on the walls of the cave, ordinary pots and pans became works of art in ancient and indigenous cultures.  The key to success for an artisan or an entrepreneur is being able to fail without consequences to one's family.  A trust fund is the traditional back up for them, but that limits the pool of creative and risk taking to rich people.  Imagine the creative surge if anyone with a dream could pursue it.   

 Similarly artisans and artists can pursue their muse without having to worry about the necessities of living, and the best of them will be rewarded for their talent.  Those with lesser talent will at worst provide amusement for themselves and perhaps a few of their neighbors.  I would expect that the piano will once again be feature of most homes and impromptu chamber groups will provide amusement for many.  Again a sorting will occur and the best chamber groups will find paid performance venues to supplement their UBI.  If the work is saleable they get extra income to support the local economy and the Government. If not they can try harder or learn to do something else.

  Unpaid volunteer workers could choose to be idle but work anyway. Also most people I know in the class of comfortable retired people are still working hard at something paid or otherwise. Why would that not become a way of life for those with no saleable skills?  Some people living on UBI might need TLC, companionship, shopping, and other services not covered by UBI that neighbors not forced to work long hours could easily supply. Note the win-win here, volunteer caregivers might well need some of that TLC and companionship as well.


 The UBI will solve the problem of automation moving the rewards of productivity to the owners of the production lines.  A few mass produced items will survive in the UBI economy but most of the economy will be based on the exchange in custom made items and home produced food. Productivity will no longer be a driving force for specialty food items, although the basics like flour and soy products and cultured meat will probably still be produced in automated factory establishments, the tacos and pizzas will be made and sold by the neighbors as well as more elaborate meals. When a food entrepreneur does not need to survive on herm gross income, hesh* can spend the time to provide a special meal service that herm neighbors will pay for, and the best will make a nice (taxable) supplemental wage for their efforts. 
 
 The few couch potatoes living off the stipend are probably just as well off the streets and not making trouble to survive. They still are consumers. They eat, buy couches, TVs, and pay rent.  If we make the "idle" comfortable enough to live a decent, if not easy, life what they do with their life is of no consequence to society. 

  Those who want to work will have plenty of opportunities under UBI. There are many jobs that require human input. But a job, which is working for someone else will be only one option, and an option at that. Employers will have to compete on working conditions as well as pay to attract those who wish to work. If a restaurant owner or retailer needs people, hesh will have to make the job more attractive than opening a lunchroom or storefront shop.

 Job availability will exceed demand, given the "Be your own boss" drive most people have. If a tradesperson with a truck can supplement UBI working for herm* neighbors the job premium would have to be very attractive to drag herm across town instead. 

 Implementing UBI could be very simple. Social Security for all adults! The basic social security benefit would cover basic needs for a family split between two adults. All income over the basic social security benefit (UBI) would be subject to a social security tax with no cap as well as a progressive income tax for government services.  Retirees paid as currently, based on social security income tax paid on income over UBI.  Grandfathers grandfathered in at current rate. Work optional until dead but all income over UBI benefit is taxed. Merge Federal SSA, state welfare, and unemployment, and let employees sort themselves out.

J'C  11/23/2017

*Hesh, herm: Gender inclusive pronouns,  https://jcarlinbl.blogspot.com/2016/04/gender-inclusive-pronouns.html

UBI and Economics

 GDP is ultimately people buying goods and services from other people. Somebody has to flip those burgers the basic income recipients are buying. 


 If a person does not work but receives the same UBI as everybody else, no one is a slave for the non-worker but all who work, work for the common good and get paid for it if someone else recognizes the value and buys it. The "buys it" may be in wages or purchase of a chattel or other art that someone has worked to make.  Some people create more recognizable value for the common good than others who are less skilled or less able and are paid more and can consume more. 
 
 But all contribute to the common good by consuming which is a necessary part of the production/consumption equation which ultimately must balance.  The couch potato consumes food, TVs, housing, clothing, etc. that someone had to be paid to make.
 
 Since low income people spend locally and buy from people they know (not robots) the income from outside the local economy stays in the local economy and all are better off.  The multiplier effect of the basic income dollar for a relatively closed local economy without box stores or Franchises to siphon off money is nearly 3 times.  The burger flipper in a local lunchroom is paid a competitive if relatively low wage in addition to the basic income or hesh wouldn't work.  Hesh spends most of herm income including UBI on local goods and services employing other local workers, creating more local demand for those goods and services and more workers to produce and vend them. 

  Assuming UBI, Medicare for All, and essentially free renewable energy, now dead ex-urban and rural suburbs will become vibrant villages of local commerce and art most of which will generate excess funds for local amenities. UBI is an external source of resources for the community which will be subject to the economic multiplier by those providing services to the UBI recipients.  Dispersal would solve the "BMR" housing issue as only those needing to be close to cities would compete for high end suburbs and high density city housing.  Note that minimum wage jobs in high density areas would no longer be attractive to distant UBI recipients.  There are many things they could do with the costs in time and money of a multi-hour commute.

 UBI should be an EFT deposit into a local bank or credit union.  National Banks should not be permitted to accept UBI transfers.  Local banks and credit unions could invest in housing and business loans for residents of the local area.  Large metro areas could be divided into historical and/or ethnic communities for the purpose of defining "Local" for this restriction. 

 The car based infrastructure will once again become a valuable resource for infrequent visits to friends and relatives and occasional visits to urban centers for shopping and entertainment.  The car will remain as the personal status symbol for rich and poor alike.  Although it will be autonomous and electric it will still use the roads and freeways unclogged by commuter traffic.  That racing striped Camaro shell will be on a Spark chassis, but hesh will be as devoted to it as before with the big Hemi.

 Some basic income recipients will use their time to pursue a dream of artisan goods production; a local service like a band, restaurant, or performance venue; or a mercantile service.  Some will succeed and become tourist magnets generating outside dollars for the community.

 Assuming an income tax the multiplier will be reduced a bit from a pure subsistence economy, but if the tax rate is progressive the reduction in the multiplier should be minimal for in-community services as these services will be provided on narrow margins as the providers will be recipients of UBI as well.

J'C 11/26/2019

UBI Enables Gig Work at all Earning Levels.

 UBI would make gig work more attractive both for employees and employers.  For higher end gig work, many people would choose their gigs more carefully and work only when they wanted to so that the working conditions and pay would have to be more attractive to induce people to work the less attractive hours or more intensive gigs.  For employers the flexibility of gig work to cover busy times even though hourly pay would be higer might be cost effective vs paying a high full time wage to get skills necessary for high traffic times.  At low end of the wage scale with essentials covered by UBI gig employers would have to pay competitively for less attractive times which are more important for service availability. There would still be people willing to work part time at low income levels to cover low demand times either as a supplement to UBI or to fill non-productive time on other projects that they might be pursuing in arts or crafts.

J'C  5/14/2019

UBI not Reparations

 While Black People, second only to Native Americans, deserve reparations for past discrimination, practically determining who gets what reparations for which discrimination, is an impossible political problem.  Instead provide UBI for all in the form of a Social Security Stipend for all adults sufficient to cover basic needs paid for by a Social Security tax on all gross income over the stipend, no deductions, no caps, and all income from any source formal, informal, legal or not included.* 

 Those who really deserve reparations and their communities will benefit the most from this outside income, since most who deserve reparations are living hand to mouth and will spend the UBI in their neighborhood on goods and services provided by others who may have a bit more to invest either by saving a bit of the UBI or investing other resources saved from outside jobs or other income.  The economic multiplier in neighborhoods of folks who have a history of systematic discrimination is nearly 3 times.  That is each outside dollar is recycled in the neighborhood three times before it is lost to goods and services outside the hood. UBI to more well off people will be either invested and out of the economy or spent in the wider economy benefiting all working people.  

 *The above is a modified comment on a stonekettle post on reparations for blacks.

 For a discussion of UBI

 A better way to pay for UBI is a progressive VAT. 

Morality as Face(Book) Groups

 Humans, as highly intelligent and extremely social animals are genetically programmed to learn all they can about the customs and mores of their tribe or social group as defined prehistorically by those whose faces they encountered on a daily basis. There could be no thought of violating these customs and mores, as doing so would cause banishment and a solo human was a dead human. This is the basis of conscience, not some big daddy in the sky.  

 As social groups grow beyond the tribal or village size like minded social groups will congregate geographically or in religious groups.  The religious groups may be dispersed far beyond a geographical area but at least in theory the groups maintain a consistent set of customs and mores that serve to control and unify the the local face groups. 

 A child brought up by members or a member of an identifiable social group will associate behavior that promotes the welfare of the group with "good" and that which is contrary to the welfare of the group as "bad." No matter how large the identifiable social group became the local community hall was the transmitter of the group's values.  Typically these community halls are small enough that all are at least nominally acquainted.   Ultimately it seems that compliance with face-group standards is the natural morality of humans. 

 As larger societies moved up the chain to associations of face groups, either religious or secular, commandments, laws and rules of behavior are established to define minimum standards of behavior that promote the welfare of the larger group.  These commandments, laws and rules are not to be confused with morality, as frequently these commandments, laws and rules will conflict with the imprinted sense of what is good and what is bad as it relates to the childhood face group.    

 A face group at that point may withdraw to the extent possible from the larger group.  See the Amish and other Anabaptist groups who live by their own moral standards ignoring the laws of the larger society except where there is unavoidable conflict. Or they may be forced to withdraw from the larger group as the Native Americans were.  Again, nothing to do with the morality of the larger society, simply rules to make the larger society work. One could make a strong case that the laws of society are by definition immoral as they force compliance with activities that may be against the face group morals of individuals within the larger society.

 The world is too big to be a face group these days but if we choose carefully there is a group of people whose customs and mores we can and do internalize. That group will look a lot like our family and close friends even when extended to people we probably will never meet.  The mores so developed may or may not be judged moral by the larger society. 

 Religious and secular associations are the traditional facilitators of face groups and define the approved social standards and mores for the group. 

Social media is emerging as a powerful force for expanding and defining these extended face groups. In some cases a small group of people or bots may be instrumental in defining the customs and mores for the group. Rallies and marches seem to be their churches and meeting halls.  Most groups are frequently in political conflict with many if not most of the other groups.

  J'C  10/20/2019 Edit 10/21 

Art and Artists

   If you cannot evaluate art without evaluating the artist you don't understand art.  I specifically avoid, indeed shun, biographical data about artists.  If their art is expiation for their monstrous private lives perhaps it is expiation for the monstrous private lives of all of us.  Their art is their legacy.  Their private lives should be buried with them and never discussed while they are alive. 

  An artist and herm art are two entirely separate and distinct entities in all cultures.  The art may live and be meaningful long after the artist has returned to dust.  While it is fun to argue about which composers of famous religious music were atheists, the fact remains that the music they composed is sung and revered by believers in any culture affected by the religion depicted in the composition.  

A "critic" is a man who creates nothing and thereby feels qualified to judge the work of creative men. There is a logic in this; he is unbiased - he hates all creative people equally.  Lazarus Long, Time Enough For Love,  Robert A Heinlein, 1973.

 The easiest thing a lazy critic can focus on is some private life peccadillo (or worse) to avoid entirely herm work as a critic of evaluating the art to help the rest of us sort out the good from the bad.   

 The current trend even extends to Jefferson's "all men are created equal" as written by a slave holder who even had children by a favored slave.  He had no choice in his culture. That he could transcend his culture to create a better world where all are equal (even though we are not there yet after 200+ years) speaks volumes about his character not to mention the character of his critics who do not even aspire to the all humans are equal standard. 

 Never trust the teller, trust the tale. The proper function of a critic is to save the tale from the artist who created it.   D.H. Lawrence

You should always read any published author especially a DWM without any biographical data clouding your mind. Words mean what they say, regardless of the personal beliefs and/or cultural influences on the author. The best authors (and artists) transcend their personal foibles to change the world.