Tweet
Here’s a summary of how this would work from this second article from Business Insider from 2013. Which by the way, initially seems a lot more plausible than an article I read recently proposed $1000 a month universally to all Americans.
1. Settle on a monthly benefit. This 2nd Business Insider article initially proposes $583 a month guaranteed basic income for all Americans.
2. Not universal or for all citizens. But not so fast! The “rich” (anyone making over $60,000 a year) are excluded from this guaranteed income so it’s not universal. So this is essentially a tax on the “rich” and indeed a redistribution proposal. The math is a little fuzzy here. They proposed $500 in one paragraph but $583 is the number used in the example. Benefits are reduced by $233 a year for each $1,000 rise in income over $30,000 a year. The article proposes that someone earning $45,000 would receive a guaranteed basic income of $3500 yearly or $291.67 a month. Anyone earning more than $60,000 a year receives nothing. I did the math myself and this would likely cost about $700 Billion based on articles I read from Think Progress and this US Census Source for 2014 Population, % of Population under 18, % of Population over 65.
Here's a sample breakdown:
$30,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,996.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
$31,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,763.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
$32,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,530.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$40,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $4,666.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$45,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $3,501.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$50,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $2,336.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$55,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $1,171.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$65,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $0.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
3. Adults with children receive an additional benefit. All parents would receive$1500 yearly or $125 monthly per child. I personally think there probably would need to be some sort of maximum benefits for say 4 or 5 children. Assume about 54.2 million children so $81.4 Billion. A positive side effect is this could be a stimulus for an increase in children in the average home. The U.S. currently has less than a 1% increase in population growth annually. Take population growth in China and India as an example.
4. Seniors (over 65) do not receive this basic income. The argument is senior citizens have social security with an average monthly benefit of $1,3000. I think senior citizens are a huge voting block and would likely never go for this if they were excluded.
How to pay for this? From the article. In parenthesis my thoughts.
It would potentially eliminate a lot of jobs. It would potentially create a lot of jobs. It would allow those with lower income to use the money where they needed it. What do you think?
1. Settle on a monthly benefit. This 2nd Business Insider article initially proposes $583 a month guaranteed basic income for all Americans.
2. Not universal or for all citizens. But not so fast! The “rich” (anyone making over $60,000 a year) are excluded from this guaranteed income so it’s not universal. So this is essentially a tax on the “rich” and indeed a redistribution proposal. The math is a little fuzzy here. They proposed $500 in one paragraph but $583 is the number used in the example. Benefits are reduced by $233 a year for each $1,000 rise in income over $30,000 a year. The article proposes that someone earning $45,000 would receive a guaranteed basic income of $3500 yearly or $291.67 a month. Anyone earning more than $60,000 a year receives nothing. I did the math myself and this would likely cost about $700 Billion based on articles I read from Think Progress and this US Census Source for 2014 Population, % of Population under 18, % of Population over 65.
Here's a sample breakdown:
$30,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,996.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
$31,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,763.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
$32,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $6,530.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$40,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $4,666.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$45,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $3,501.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$50,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $2,336.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$55,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $1,171.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
...
$65,000 yearly household income would see a GBI benefit of $0.00 yearly. Plus $1500 yearly per child.
3. Adults with children receive an additional benefit. All parents would receive$1500 yearly or $125 monthly per child. I personally think there probably would need to be some sort of maximum benefits for say 4 or 5 children. Assume about 54.2 million children so $81.4 Billion. A positive side effect is this could be a stimulus for an increase in children in the average home. The U.S. currently has less than a 1% increase in population growth annually. Take population growth in China and India as an example.
4. Seniors (over 65) do not receive this basic income. The argument is senior citizens have social security with an average monthly benefit of $1,3000. I think senior citizens are a huge voting block and would likely never go for this if they were excluded.
How to pay for this? From the article. In parenthesis my thoughts.
First, eliminating all state and federal programs for low-income Americans will save almost $800 billion. (This number is mind blowing)
Second, additional funding comes from elimination of benefits in the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare subsidies will be $107 billion a year starting Jan. 1, 2014 and the Medicaid expansion is another $71 billion. (Note: As I understand it this would eliminate only portions of AHA or Obamacare)
Third, the remaining $180 billion in funding can come in the form of new revenues. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction $71 billion and implementing a carbon tax $105 billion would just about be enough.
Phasing out the programs costs $206 billion for a total cost of $1.147 trillion.
Second, additional funding comes from elimination of benefits in the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare subsidies will be $107 billion a year starting Jan. 1, 2014 and the Medicaid expansion is another $71 billion. (Note: As I understand it this would eliminate only portions of AHA or Obamacare)
Third, the remaining $180 billion in funding can come in the form of new revenues. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction $71 billion and implementing a carbon tax $105 billion would just about be enough.
Phasing out the programs costs $206 billion for a total cost of $1.147 trillion.
Comment