[Poll] - Basic Income ($2000-2500/m) would you still work?

[Logwyn]

That is actually false. Price fixing is illegal, and as long as governments are not printing additional money to make up for the basic income, then it has no affect on the market besides allowing suppliers to supply more items because more people will be demanding them.

If you are going to disprove something in economic grounds, get your economic stance correct first. Because on top of this, taxes MUST be significantly higher to achieve a base income.

- - - Updated - - -



Not everybody lives in San Francisco. I have been, as a student, surviving on $700.00 a month for the past 3 years. My expenses are as follows: $475 for rent (utilities included), $80 for phone and service, the rest for food. And I some how manage to make this work, at least in my particular state.

Someone should not be living in a house similar to someone who makes 40k a year or more if they are only being a leech on society.

So you live by yourself in an apartment or on campus then? I also assume you have meal plan at the University? And you have health insurance or just go to the clinic on campus? Basically everything is within walking distance or you have a car? You pay insurance on the car? Gas?

How do you pay for books for school? Scholarship? You have to count all the things that are paid for by scholarship/grant or part of school as income. Else you aren't living on 1000 a month. I also don't live in San Francisco. I"d be hard pressed to find somewhere to pay rent and utilities for 425 unless its one of the 200 a month apartments that you wonder if you are going to get robbed or shot tonight.

[May90]

Where did I say it was a problem? I only stated I was amazed that so many are fine with 2k a month. I make more than that big weekly after taxes, so obviously it amazes me that people would settle for so little willingly, be ok not doing anything to make more. Obviously the results are somewhat skewed as I'm sure non-US people have voted so that 34% is potentially inflated/deflated.

It depends solely on your needs. I spend around $1.2k a month on necessities (housing, food, Internet, phone, etc.), everything else is for entertainment and emergencies (oh, and I live in the US). Then, I know people in this very area with 10 times my income, who manage to spend it all somehow... *shrugs*

[breadisfunny]

yes because every extra dollar helps.

[Jakexe]

I've "lived" on half that, survived is a better term. So I think 2k is easily enough to live off. In saying that I couldn't maintain my lifestyle with that much so I'd continue to work. Not to mention I thoroughly enjoy both my jobs, so I wouldn't want to quit.

Both my fields won't be getting replaced by machines anytime soon anyway.

[Vizardlorde]

with 2500/mo I could live without working but I would still do oddjobs for extra cash like fixing pcs translating documents filling out paper work etc. anything less than 2500 would force me to get an actual job or get a gf to split bills with me where I live.

[INVASMANIXOXOXO]

I make just north of 40k a year as a 23 year old business college graduate in one of the lowest income states in the union (Idaho), so for me the answer is a definite no (although I am very gun hoe on capitalism on all that, I lived in EU for 8+ years and I am definitely part of the work to live camp as opposed to live to work), maybe after the inevitable adjustment period of when my job would pay 60ish I would guess then maybe, but I still doubt it. My degree is in economics, so I am very in tune with dealing with trade offs. Giving up 1/3 of my time for double the income would not be worth it, unless I got wifed up with kids in the interim.

[xChurch]

Yes if going back to school counts as work. Hard to not get bored of just sitting at home all day, might not need to work perse, but a few serious hobbies that would benefit more people than just yourself.

[Captain N]

As someone who already waived $12,000/month for $10,000/month to spend more time with my family I would still continue to work. Like a lot of other posters I would lose my mind if I stayed home. Also I enjoy being able to travel and that's just not possible just living off a Basic Income.

[Deleted]

Without a dramatic increase - ceteris paribus- in price for our basic needs I would probably work part time. A nice office job in accounting somewhere from 9am-14pm. Or something in that ballpark. Just doing nothing or whatever you like it fun for sometime, but quickly boring after.

[oxymoronic]

Alright, and what exactly is your issue with me? This seems very much like a personal issue than one that's relevant to the thread.

no issue. call it how i see it and im a good judge

[Qualia]

Can't really live comfortably with just 2000 / 2500 per month, so yes, I'd still work.

[Lady Dragonheart]

no issue. call it how i see it and im a good judge

How you see what, exactly? You have actually called anything. >.>

[Deleted]

Giving money away for nothing is a horrible idea. Generally speaking if you have to live off of this you shouldn't really get a choice of where you will be living. IMHO the way this will get implemented is by providing people with necessities i.e. apartment, food stamps(so you don't get to throw it all on smokes), and throw in internet & a small monthly allowance for shits and giggles. That would fix the issue while still encouraging participating in the work force.

The "problem" is that you'd end up living in what basically would be a huge apartment complex in the middle of nowhere more or less. This would in turn help with congestion in big cities while leading to at least some infrastructure being developed in places where it otherwise wouldn't.

There are other things needed in order to get this to work i.e. free college in order to ensure that you don't end up with a segment of the population which will simply be stuck as a dead weight due to living conditions.Right now it's not needed but in the future it will be and when that time comes lets just say i'm happy that i'm not in a position that means i'll have to worry about that.

And now the response to the thread - yes i still would work since i enjoy my work. There's also the part where i'm not a sociable person so not having things to do for extended amounts of time leads to eXtreme boredom.

[Kathandira]

$30,000 a year is fucking poor. Of course I'd still work.


Regardless, while not having financial obligations that demand I work for income might alter employment behavior, I'd still work because I like science and the real opportunities are going to require being fantastically wealthy to the extent that you could essentially open your own lab or working for someone else.

Agreed. $30,000 a year would cover a good amount of my bills, but I would still want to have money to do things. I would love to have money to buy better musical equipment, and that stuff ain't cheap.

I would love to be able to do many things that I currently just cannot do. So basically, I would work so I can afford leisurely things. Which would be investing right back into the economy.

[wheresmywoft]

Would work, $30K/yr isn't much. Lots of things I'd still like to do and experience. I would definitely be going on vacation twice a year instead of just once.

[Deleted]

Id stop working the second this is implemented.
Why would I need more then 2500 a month to live a good life.