Study Reveals the Terrible Consequences of Universal Basic Income @visualeconomiken

Check out our previous videos! ⬇️

🔴Why Are Japanese Companies Dead?

🔴Why Are Muslim Countries Poorer?

🔴Why Are Big Companies Fleeing China?

[Otto-czby]

Milton Friedman proposed the negative income tax as an alternative to the current welfare state. He proposed it as a transitioning plan, before doing away with all forms of welfare.

[sshender]

You neglected to mention that Finland is possibly the most non-representative country out there, being a wealthy, ethnically and culturally homogeneous and very high trust society with a very high level of fiscal maturity and responsibility where hard work is held in high regard while ostentatious displays of wealth are frowned upon. This is diametrically opposed to the vast majority of the world which is poor, low in trust (both societal and institutional), stratified with a high Gini coefficient and with different cultural norms and attitudes to work.
To my mind, this is a bad idea in the best of countries but downright suicidal in the less well off ones.

[rratschable]

This argument completely ignores the reason why UBI is trending: AI and robotics. When robots make all the goods and no one has a job, presumably we still need someone who can afford to buy those goods (and the top 1% don't buy that much). Also, you ignore pensions and Social Security which are already everywhere.

[tsuchan]

Good luck surfing in Malibu for $1000/ month.

[jason]

$1, 000 is laughably, is not even enough to cover rent in most states

[Naturenerd]

Alaska has Universal Basic Income with Oil Money.

[Ausplainer]

Also: the increased taxes needed to fund UBI would discourage people from working more. Why should i work harder and invest in children when others are getting high and gaming all day? The tax base would shrink to the point they'd need to print money. Let's not consider the influx of immigration you'd have.

[blakebeesley]

This video does not address the underlying reason why people like Sam and Elon are considering this approach. How does global society plan to deal with mass layoffs due to increased capabilities of AI and robotics? Yes we are not there at the moment, and yes there will be new jobs created, though as time progresses the functionality and capacity for AI and humanoids to supplement then replace workers is an obvious trend. Societies take time to adapt, and often governments are slow to act. Technology will not wait for lawmakers, and we need to be proactive, not reactive, in brainstorming and studying different approaches. No one wins if people are no longer competitive in the labor market.

[goodtipa]

I think negative tax to fill the net income to minimum of $1000 would sound saner than UBI. The country should not waste this budget on people who already getting good salaries. $1000 is not enough to live nice, it's barely enough to live. Most people will want to live better and this minimum income will give them guarantee that they will not starve while studying or searching for better work. However, this negative tax should also be accompanied by minimum salary rate, so that it won't be abused by employers that will try to convince juniors that it's OK to work for free, just for experience.

[nydydn]

People who say giving money to poor people who abuse drugs is wasted because they'll use it on drugs have a problem with logic. These poor people who abuse drugs, abuse it exactly because their life is shit because they don't have money. Give them money->their life isn't shit->they don't need to escape reality through abusing drugs. Abusing drugs is basically the same as fast-forwarding through boring shit parts of a movie. Except that the movie is your life. The only difference in this analogy is that the movie might get better, but if you just fast-forward through life, you'll have to keep doing it because nothing will change, until the end of it.
This is also proven by the "war on drugs" results. Completely forbidding drugs is unlikely to be effective in a country that is not a strict dictatorship, so basically nothing changes. If anything, it makes things worse because someone with a shit life due to being poor, will now have a shit life due to being poor, but also with a criminal record. But say somehow the state manages to really be effective in forbidding drugs. Now poor people are still poor people. Their lives will still be shit, but now their only way out will be to skip straight to the end, and this theoretical country, would have to install nets around factories named Foxconn.

[amymegginson-uzjj]

I think people on social security for ANY reason, and make under 60k or whatever it actually takes to supply food and shelter, should be awarded something more liveable. $1200 a month is ridiculous

[Castiel]

Negative income tax is designed to replace existing welfare programs, which work like poverty traps. Instead Negative income tax reduces your financial benefits as your income grows, so that you are always better off if you work.

And you’d certainly not be able to live lavishly on it.

[SamBroadway]

I'm on social security and $1, 000 a month is more than I receive on social security.... Where can I volunteer for one of these experiments, so I can almost afford my bills

[nietur]

Without UBI, we would need unemployment benefits. But unemployment benefits compete with employment.
The argument against UBI that is "People wouldn't work", true or not, suggests we should extort people to work with their basic needs not being met. And the same people who use this argument think people pursue higher salaries above basic needs. So wouldn't people still want to increase their disposable incomes / quality of life if their basic needs are met, therefore work?

[Ocato]

The problem is also that while INITIALLY it may replace all welfare, but sooner or later people would demand for a single mother of disabled child to receive more than adult male NEET who just don't want to work, and we end up with all the welfare with UBI on the top.

[l.f.p.]

The question is not if universal basic income has good or bad consequences - the question is how to make it work. Here in Denmark we have a de-facto basic income. But it is implemented in such a way that it looks as if we haven't. The system must be developed so as to achieve more of the benefits while avoiding the negative consequences.

[keirenle]

Once AI is taken away most of the jobs then UBI would not just a frivolous concept but an inevitable reality

[samuelcarnall]

Soooo what *should* have been studied was worker productivity with a UBI. They work fewer hours, sure, and made less money, but if they remained as productive or more productive, that would show that the actual economic benefits in terms of output weren't affected.

[Mick_Unfiltered]

The reason UBI would work in Finland and would never work in Kenya, is because European and East Asian societies value hard work and lifting one’s self up, the Africans though, they’d use it on basic necessities and squander it, you could give them a western income and they’d never build wealth even with their low cost of living… it’s a cultural and mindset issue. Nations are not rich because of resources, they’re rich because of the people in them.

“Swap the populations of Norway and Nigeria, in 5 years Norway would be destitute and Nigeria would be wealthy”

It’s that simple.

We should stop looking for ways to equalise the world, they’re always going to be poorer than us, and they’re always going to hate us for it.

[CMVBrielman]

Negative income tax is *not* the same as UBI.