Keith Evans
2 min readFeb 22, 2019

--

All that a UBI would accomplish would be the eventual subsidizing of corporate labor costs with public money. We have enough of that going on now with large employers handing out pamphlets detailing how to apply for benefits in new hire packets. The fully dependent poor could actually see less benefit right from the start as the safety net is abandoned to “pay for” the UBI program. Then the working poor would quickly find their benefit eroded by inflation that simply can’t be avoided when “everyone” gets free money.

Proponents of UBI claim it would free up the people’s time to allow them to follow their passions and dreams. However, as soon as the benefit is eroded to $1 less than minimum subsistence the employers would be back in the driver’s seat with no incentive to raise wages, as they would be providing “spending money”, not income necessary to live. Wages would drop in relation to the cost of living like a rock on a calm day and no safety net would be there to catch anyone.

A federally funded job guarantee administered by states and counties with a livable wage and benefits sufficient to provide dignity would pin the economy to the work hour. It would set the wage floor for private sector employers and also serve as a stable of employees with their social and work skills intact across business cycles. I could see the utility of a UBI type cash benefit for those who could not, or simply choose not to, work which would minimize any government control and intrusion, but only on top of a job guarantee.

I believe that to control inflation it is necessary that any such program be countercyclical to the business cycle and provide some public benefit for the payment. Both are satisfied with a job guarantee and many services now filled by volunteers could become paid work to assure the services are available. Many would find such service to society rewarding and stay with the program and the definition of work could be broadly expanded to include the passions of many, similar to FDR’s New Deal work programs that paid workers to build theaters and also artists, actors, and musicians to exhibit and provide their crafts for others.

A job guarantee could also be utilized to fill the education gap and train for jobs that don’t require university-level education but are challenging enough to require some training. People could be paid for time in training to be tradesmen/women, a task previously filled by union apprenticeships and sorely missed. One only has to take a walk around any urban area or small town in rural areas to find plenty of work needing to be done but going undone for lack of a path to profit. Climate change mitigation also presents many demands for labor to plant trees and cover crops, as well as solar panel installations and home energy efficiency improvements. It just makes little sense to pay people to sit at home when so much needs to be done.

--

--

Keith Evans
Keith Evans

Written by Keith Evans

Meandering to a different drummer.

Responses (1)