This article was originally published by Scheerpost.
Here’s how the world should operate in
simple terms: A certain country or region or city or township or Hobbit hole
tries something in order to help their society or group or hovel – if it works,
other places then do it. If it doesn’t work, other places don’t do it. It’s
like when you were a kid and you saw your brother slide down the banister and
rack himself on the newel post – You then thought, “Maybe that activity is
not for me.” But if he didn’t nail himself in the jewels, you probably
thought, “I think I’ll try that.”
That’s how the United States government
should work, but it doesn’t. For-profit healthcare, corporate personhood, the
drug war, funding terrorists overseas that we call “moderate rebels,” etc. –
all of these things have been tried, they fu***n’ suck every time, and we keep
doing them. The U.S. continually racks itself on the newel post all day long
and then responds, “I think I’ll try that again.”
But the reverse should be true also – if a
city or country anywhere in the world tries something and it works great, we
should do it.
This
brings me to Universal Basic Income: everybody receiving money from a
government simply for being a citizen, no questions asked. It’s high time we
try it in the US and see whether it works. Oh wait, I just remembered – it’s
been tried countless times and worked every damn time. How do I know that? …Reading.
As Rutger Bregman details in his book “Utopia For Realists,” UBI has been tried many times — in Canada, Alaska, Africa, the US, Europe, and more.
There was
a study in Britain where 13 men who had lived on the
streets for years were given £3,000 each (about $4,500 at the time). Did they
use it for hundreds of pricey almond milk lattes, or giant bags of crack, or
maybe just wad it up into balls and wipe themselves with them? Nope, turns out
they didn’t do any of those things. Eighteen months after receiving the money,
over half were no longer homeless, and all of them had improved their lives
significantly.
As Bregman noted, “Even The Economist had to conclude that ‘the most efficient
way to spend money on the homeless might be to give it to them.’”
No! We
can’t possibly do that! We here in the US have to take the money meant to help
the homeless and launder it through all kinds of plans and incentives and
bureaucratic digestive tracts that result in one out of every 100 people in
extreme poverty receiving a gift certificate for a free basket of breadsticks
at Arby’s.
In another
program Bregman describes, everybody in a village in Kenya was given $500, about a year’s wages. Several months
later, the village had been completely transformed. People had better jobs,
sturdier home structures, and healthier kids. “In Namibia figures for
malnutrition took a nosedive (from 42% to 10%), as did those for truancy (from
40% to nothing) and crime (down by 42%),” writes Bregman.
So, basically, there’s almost a silver bullet to ending poverty and decreasing crime. Well, we better avoid it like the plague. Let’s go back to giving homeless people a can of soup and a pair of mismatched socks. If they collect enough cans and socks, they can build a house out of them!
The point is basic income has been tested
numerous times. By 2010, there were income transfer programs for 110
million families in 45 different countries. In North
Carolina, in 2001 the Cherokee were getting $6,000 a year per family thanks to
a casino they had built. When that started, for most of those families that
money took them out of extreme poverty, and the Cherokee children saw drastic
changes. Their crime rates, behavioral issues, and alcohol abuse went down
significantly. The money literally changed their lives. (And sure, all casinos
are based on drunk people spending money they don’t have on machines they don’t
know are rigged in hopes of getting the money they will never get. But you can’t
get mad at the Cherokee because that’s also the basic definition of capitalism:
Drunk people spending money we don’t have on machines we don’t know are rigged
in hopes of getting the money we’ll never get.)
The University of Manchester summarized
many UBI programs in poor African communities. They found, overall, the money
was put to good use: Poverty decreased, and while the programs cost less than
other so-called solutions, there were myriad long-term benefits that
impacted health and safety. How shocking! The thing we know works seems
to work! (Hopefully, somebody can study this a little more and find out if it
works.)
Bregman then writes of NGO workers, “So why to send over
to Africa expensive white folks in SUVs when we can simply hand over their
salaries to the poor?” Great point. At the very least, let’s give away the
SUVs.
The latest
basic income “test” reported last month in Fast Company showed that it
worked yet again in Hudson, NY. Despite all of these successful trials, people
still argue, “We can’t have basic income because the poor will just use it
for beer and cigarettes!” Well, first of all – So what? The world’s on
fire. Beer and cigarettes sound like just what the doctor ordered. In fact, I
think we’re at the point when we can call alcohol and tobacco survival foods.
(I am a longtime supporter of Universal Basic Beer and Cigarettes.)
But perhaps
more importantly, as Bregman notes, “A major
study by the World Bank demonstrated that in 82% of all researched cases
in Africa, Latin America, and Asia, alcohol, and tobacco consumption actually
declined.” Declined? Well, then I have to say these poor people have their
priorities completely wrong.
Another major argument against UBI is, “It’s
not fair. Giving people money for doing nothing simply isn’t fair.” My
response to that is twofold. First, it actually is fair because the money would
go to literally everyone. Hence the word “universal” is in the name. (It would be
weird to have something called “Universal Basic Income” that only went to a
vintage clothing store clerk named Stanley.) Secondly, who told you fairness
mattered in life? Who told you fairness has anything to do with our stupid
world? There’s no fairness. In the first three seconds, you come out of the
womb, life is not fair. You’re covered in blood and mucus, some doctor slaps
you on the ass, and you’re told your name is something you’ve never even heard
before! Completely unfair. You’re just lying there going, “Chet? My name’s
CHET?!”
Some people are born rich as sh*t.
Some people are born poor as sh*t.
Some people are born hot as sh*t. (I mean,
not as a baby but… later. You get the point.)
Some people are born in wealthy areas with
safe streets, good schools, and clean water.
Some people are born in poverty with
crime-ridden streets, terrible schools, and water that has a crispy film on the
top like a cancerous crème brulée.
In our society, on average, men get paid
more than women, white people get paid more than Black people and Native
people, and most everyone gets paid more than ugly people. (I’m not even
kidding – ugly people earn up to 15% less per hour in the
workplace.)
Society. Is. Not. Fair.
So if I say that universal basic income
would solve several of society’s problems and someone responds that UBI’s not
fair, they’re being completely illogical. It’s like if I said a law against
killing endangered species would save the exotic birds, and you retort, “But
we can’t do that because it’s not purple.”
Besides, perhaps giving people a better
shot at life, a better shot at not struggling day-in and day-out, perhaps
that’s actually fairer than this shitstorm we have now.
Another argument against UBI is that it
will make people lazy. And I would agree with that except… it’s not true.
Studies show it doesn’t make people work less and even if it did, I would say,
“GOOD!” Under capitalism, you are born free, but then you spend the rest of your
existence trying to rent back your life from corporate rulers. So if UBI
decreases that slavery by a percentage point, that’s a good thing.
And the final argument against UBI is that
we can’t afford it. Well, as Bregman notes, “Eradicating poverty in the U.S.
would cost only $175 billion, less than 1% of the GDP. That’s roughly a quarter
of the U.S. military spending.”
So not only do we have enough money, but
we also would be saving hundreds of billions in the form of services we
wouldn’t need anymore. We’d have a more physically and mentally healthy
population, decreased crime and abuse, etc. All told, we would save so much
more than we would lose. And even if we didn’t – I DON’T CARE! I WANT TO END
POVERTY!
Anyway, it’s time for universal basic
income. Technology advances exponentially. Most jobs will disappear. And
instead of demanding more wage slavery, we should work less and have a universal
basic income. Will UBI solve all the problems of capitalism? Absolutely not.
It’s the first of many steps toward helping people realize the capitalistic
market economy is a guaranteed death spiral that we have the power to
stop.
Written by
Lee Camp is the host of the hit comedy news show Redacted Tonight. His new book, ‘Bullet Points and Punch Lines’, is available at LeeCampBook.com, and his stand-up comedy special can be streamed for free at LeeCampAmerican.com.
Think your
friends would be interested? Share this story!
RT NEWS
Post a Comment