In Part 1 I introduced my ideas for the Guaranteed Universal Basic Income, or GUBI for short. One of the questions people might ask is, "Wouldn't there be many people who would choose not to work? Is that a problem, and what would be the solution?"
Yes, there would be some people who decide not to work in non-stay-at-home, non-volunteer occupations, although living just above the poverty line is not too attractive. That's precisely the point, though: if you're a U.S. citizen your country will never allow you to be destitute, period.
However, there are a couple conditions:
1. That $20,000 GUBI for Americans 65 and older? Well, that would be the average. The minimum would be the adult GUBI ($11,500 in 2013 dollars but with the Chained CPI-E kicker and the 5 year survivor kicker if your spouse living in the same household dies). The maximum would be $30,000. Employers would continue to send W-2 forms, and you'd get points toward boosting your retirement benefit above $11,500 up to the $30,000 maximum based on your lifetime W-2s. For perspective, today's average Social Security retirement benefit is about $15,000 per year, and the maximum is barely over $30,000. Today Social Security has no minimum benefit and certainly no benefit based exclusively on citizenship.
2. As today, but also for women, you would be required to serve your country if the United States Congress votes to institute a military draft. The draft must be income- and wealth-blind (meaning no student deferments beyond the end of the academic year), military assignments must be free of political influence, and all able bodied children, grandchildren, nieces, and nephews of all members of Congress must be the first drafted. (Non-able bodied draftees who are still mentally capable would still serve albeit stateside.) The draft must be reauthorized at least every 18 months.
3. There would be a limited ability for the government to require adult GUBI recipients under age 62 to work outside the home to maintain benefits. That requirement would kick in only if there are neither minor children nor disabled adults in the same household (or if there is at least one nonworking parent already at home), the adult has not worked at least 20% of full time for the past 5 years (with students making satisfactory progress and disability/medical absences counted as working), the recipient has reached his/her 23rd birthday, and the recipient is at least mentally able to work. At least three distinctly different part-time jobs must be offered, and all must be either workable at home or reachable within a 45 minute commute on public transportation. All positions must be of a predominantly public/social benefit nature. One of the jobs may include a hazardous, extra exertion, off hours, and/or distant work bonus, and that difference must be clearly disclosed if offered. There would be reviews for satisfactory job performance. These work requirements would not kick in unless labor force participation for 23 to 61 year olds (inclusive) drops below 65% (assessed at a state level), i.e. unless there's a genuine problem. (On edit: a somewhat simpler way to do this, and one that would be constitutionally less problematic, is for the government to offer a variety of $1/hour jobs. Those jobs would generate W-2s, etc., and the Social Security Administration would warn affected recipients if the past 5 years shows less than, say, $2500 of W-2 reported income. The recipient would then have time to report the applicable work-equivalent exemption, if any, or to generate more W-2 earnings. And the government would always be the $1/hour employer of last resort.)
4. Remember that employers can set any compensation they want, and that can include supplemental group medical benefits or not. (Such benefits would be taxable as personal income but would be deductible as business expenses.) The minimum wage would end. However, they would have to offer sufficiently high compensation to induce people to work, and there would be harsh penalties for employing non-work eligible foreigners. That would be great: no American would be truly desperate to work (and thus vulnerable to exploitation), "internships" would need to be genuinely valuable, and employers would have a tougher time setting up modern sweatshops in rural America, in particular. The vast majority of employers would be thrilled with GUBI, though, precisely because they'd escape minimum wage and medical insurance requirements, and because GUBI would stimulate consumer demand for their products and services.
Yes, there would be some people who decide not to work in non-stay-at-home, non-volunteer occupations, although living just above the poverty line is not too attractive. That's precisely the point, though: if you're a U.S. citizen your country will never allow you to be destitute, period.
However, there are a couple conditions:
1. That $20,000 GUBI for Americans 65 and older? Well, that would be the average. The minimum would be the adult GUBI ($11,500 in 2013 dollars but with the Chained CPI-E kicker and the 5 year survivor kicker if your spouse living in the same household dies). The maximum would be $30,000. Employers would continue to send W-2 forms, and you'd get points toward boosting your retirement benefit above $11,500 up to the $30,000 maximum based on your lifetime W-2s. For perspective, today's average Social Security retirement benefit is about $15,000 per year, and the maximum is barely over $30,000. Today Social Security has no minimum benefit and certainly no benefit based exclusively on citizenship.
2. As today, but also for women, you would be required to serve your country if the United States Congress votes to institute a military draft. The draft must be income- and wealth-blind (meaning no student deferments beyond the end of the academic year), military assignments must be free of political influence, and all able bodied children, grandchildren, nieces, and nephews of all members of Congress must be the first drafted. (Non-able bodied draftees who are still mentally capable would still serve albeit stateside.) The draft must be reauthorized at least every 18 months.
3. There would be a limited ability for the government to require adult GUBI recipients under age 62 to work outside the home to maintain benefits. That requirement would kick in only if there are neither minor children nor disabled adults in the same household (or if there is at least one nonworking parent already at home), the adult has not worked at least 20% of full time for the past 5 years (with students making satisfactory progress and disability/medical absences counted as working), the recipient has reached his/her 23rd birthday, and the recipient is at least mentally able to work. At least three distinctly different part-time jobs must be offered, and all must be either workable at home or reachable within a 45 minute commute on public transportation. All positions must be of a predominantly public/social benefit nature. One of the jobs may include a hazardous, extra exertion, off hours, and/or distant work bonus, and that difference must be clearly disclosed if offered. There would be reviews for satisfactory job performance. These work requirements would not kick in unless labor force participation for 23 to 61 year olds (inclusive) drops below 65% (assessed at a state level), i.e. unless there's a genuine problem. (On edit: a somewhat simpler way to do this, and one that would be constitutionally less problematic, is for the government to offer a variety of $1/hour jobs. Those jobs would generate W-2s, etc., and the Social Security Administration would warn affected recipients if the past 5 years shows less than, say, $2500 of W-2 reported income. The recipient would then have time to report the applicable work-equivalent exemption, if any, or to generate more W-2 earnings. And the government would always be the $1/hour employer of last resort.)
4. Remember that employers can set any compensation they want, and that can include supplemental group medical benefits or not. (Such benefits would be taxable as personal income but would be deductible as business expenses.) The minimum wage would end. However, they would have to offer sufficiently high compensation to induce people to work, and there would be harsh penalties for employing non-work eligible foreigners. That would be great: no American would be truly desperate to work (and thus vulnerable to exploitation), "internships" would need to be genuinely valuable, and employers would have a tougher time setting up modern sweatshops in rural America, in particular. The vast majority of employers would be thrilled with GUBI, though, precisely because they'd escape minimum wage and medical insurance requirements, and because GUBI would stimulate consumer demand for their products and services.
No comments:
Post a Comment