Tom,

As you have probably gathered, I have been working for most of
the last 50 years to obtain justice for all. Justice doesn't mean
a chicken in every pot, or a BI. IT means no more than that a
person will keep what he produces and shares equally the bounties
of nature.

So, the problem with some of your remarks is that there are
consequences.

Such as the threshold, something that occurs often in economics
but is given a variety of names.

If one gets $900 for no work - but $1,100 (net after taxes $800)
if you work - why should you work? I might choose unemployment
plus welfare as a preferred alternative (perhaps with some
off-tax work under the counter). This is done everywhere now.

It's a constant welfare problem. If the welfare is not enough to
provide a reasonable standard of living, cries arise for more.
Yet, as welfare rises and approaches real net wages, there is
greater incentive not to work, but to collect the freebies.

If welfare is reduced, more people work but the demands to
increase welfare increase. Incidentally, it was found that if
unemployment payments were extended over a greater time, the
search for work sagged.

Reducing the length of time that unemployment benefits are paid
results in a scramble for jobs.

Obviously! This is just an extension of the two assumptions.
You'll recall those. Yet, it's just another threshold thing that
makes the welfare theorist have puppies.

With regard to "black" working, you may recall my story about
those poor people living in low rent flats in Toronto. The
council found that they were working two or three jobs (not
allowed) and with the advantage of low rents, saving enough to
get a home of their own.

The puffed up peacocks of the Toronto City Council were properly
annoyed at this. Needless to say, I loved it and used the CBC to
good effect supporting these people.   

You suggested "raising the minimum wage to a realistic $12 -14 an
hour, but then the cost would fall totally on those businesses
that use minimum wage employees".

Not quite - the cost would fall entirely on the hamburger
consumers.

(Not even that quite. It would fall on those speculative
land-values I've talked about - but that gets a little
technical.)

What the heck is a clawback?

Harry

********************************************
Henry George School of Social Science
of Los Angeles
Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91042
Tel: 818 352-4141  --  Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
********************************************

<clip>

Thomas:  I don't see a BI system as replacing the work for wages
system.  I
see the BI system as a support system for a variety of ills.  On
a previous
posting, I suggested $10,000 which is about what we Guarantee our
Senior
Citizens through government universality pensions

At about $900 a month for Basic Income, there is a strong
incentative to get
a job.  You're never going to buy a new house or car on $900 a
month.  But
if you got a minimum wage job which brings you in about $1100
gross and
maybe $800 net, all of sudden that shit work becomes worth doing
with a BI
supplement.  Now the same thing could be accomplished by raising
the minimum
wage to a realistic $12 -14 an hour, but then the cost would fall
totally on
those businesses that use minimum wage employees and they would
scream -
unfair and I think rightly so.  Plus, it would still leave those
with no
jobs dependent on Provincial Welfare which is less than $900 a
month and
creates tons of problems and expenses.

But for those who can't find work or for some personal reason do
not want to
work at this point in their life, there is a support system that
they can
depend on to supply basic needs.  That one would spend their
whole life
living on $900 a month is a ridicoulous assumption.

As to the last sentence, I have mentioned in a previous posting
that there
is clawback when there is no need through the tax system.

Respectfully,

Thomas Lunde


 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003
 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to