John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: Give money to people in prison??? > > Why? They can't really spend it, unless they are then charged for their > accommodation. >
They would be charged. They would have to pay taxes if their income is high enough. People in prison often have sources of income. I say, no means testing means no means testing. Granted, Social Security, which is the only present non-means tested program, is not paid to people in prison. See: http://www.ssa.gov/reentry/#a0=0 Instead it would just build up. > Well, they could give it away to charity or to their families. But if it built up, that would be okay. Someone would inherit it if they die in prison. If not, the government would get it back. > Heck, sounds like a saving scheme, just commit a crime to get into a white > collar prison and when you get out you have a nice nest egg built up. > Why not? Do you think it would be better for society to have ex-prisoners starve, or wander around homeless? Remember we are talking about a world with unlimited robot-supplied material wealth. Ex-cons will not be taking away resources that other people might have because they will be enough for everyone. There will be no reason to be jealous of them or to restrict their access, any more than we would today restrict their access to the Internet or public libraries. > No, the money needs to be given to people who will pump it straight back > into the economy, and people in need will spend it, prisoners aren't in > need. > Actually those who do not pump it back into the economy will also help because that will reduce resource consumption somewhat. Even if material goods are very cheap they would still cost something, so people who do not consume them would be doing the rest of us a favor. A miser leaves wealth for others to use. A problem arises when everyone saves and no one spends. - Jed
