You originally wrote:

“The taxpayer already funds UBI for millions of people in the form of disability payments, social security, and other forms of welfare.”

And then you asked this question:

“Do we observe them predominantly making better long-term career choices, increasing production, becoming healthier and happier, and all the other benefits you suggest?”

This question seemed to be predicated on your incorrect claim that;

“The taxpayer already funds UBI for millions of people in the form of disability payments, social security, and other forms of welfare.”

In such circumstances, the question is nonsensical, because it’s effectively asking about what people who don’t receive non-means-tested benefits do with the non-means-tested benefits they don’t receive.

Your second question was;

“Would UBI even end welfare cliffs?”

You then went on to answer that question yourself. Sorry if I didn’t realise you were expecting me to answer it, too.

My answer to that question is that UBI would significantly reduce welfare cliffs, but not end them, since some means-tested benefits would still probably exist.

Your answer to my question is interesting, because whilst it suggests the harm that might occur , it does not support your claim that;

“Whatever benefits accrue around Paul will be at least matched by harm around Peter.”

Also, your answer shows an apparent lack of understanding of Economics and uses some somewhat outlandish examples and points to some unlikely potential consequences. The contractor who doesn’t do the flooring on the millionaire’s yacht can be employed doing something else instead. He may even be employed by people who pay his wages out of their Basic Income. And there need be no less medicine produced, since Basic Income is only a financial transfer payment. It does not represent the loss of real resources.

So, in answer to your final question;

“How’s that for harm?”;

You haven’t clearly demonstrated that there would be harm on the scale you’ve suggested. Consequences and harm are not the same thing. And whilst I agree that ‘harm’ is possible, that doesn’t mean the harm will be anything like equal to the benefits of Basic Income.

What I suggest you should do now is to go and take some sort of ‘Introduction to Economics’ course, instead of spending time arguing about Basic Income as if you understand Economics so much better than you actually do.

Written by

Tech Fan, Philosopher, Economist and Basic Income advocate. tiny.cc/RJMedStuff

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store