The Root of Most Problems

Before I get into the article, I want to address some key issues. I know that just by putting the phrase "Universal Income" in the subtitle, most people are either coming in ready to support or are coming in ready to tear me to shreds. Most people already have their minds set on whether this idea is good or bad. As a preface, I am not advocating for a fully socialist system. I am also not saying we should fully abolish the class system. The other thing I will not be addressing is how to fund a universal basic income. The scope of this article is addressing the usefulness of a universal income from an ethical standpoint and an economic standpoint, as well as addressing the most common argument against a universal income.

The ethical arguments for a universal basic income have been made before by others. The benefits to the unemployed, disabled, and impoverished are clear: they would be able to afford food and a place to eat. Rob at ARicherYou has an excellent article (link at the bottom) that explains the benefits to middle-class and entrepreneurs. For example, reduced crime rates as theft and burglaries are common crimes done out of desperation. Why are they desperate? They do not have money. Another example he gives is offsetting the impact of losing your job, specifically with how fast jobs are being automated. Having a basic income to rely on when you lose your job is important and with many Americans living paycheck to paycheck, by the time they would get their unemployment checks, they are already late on bills.

There are reasons he did not touch on, however, such as reduced suicide rates and reduced abortion rates, since financial reasons are the second leading reason for abortions according to Heather D. Boonstra of Guttmacher Institute in a 2016 article entitled "Abortion in the Lives of Women Struggling Financially: Why Insurance Coverage Matters", published in the Guttmacher Policy Review. In this article, she informs her readers that "Although the U.S. abortion rate has reached its lowest level since 1973, abortion is increasingly concentrated among low-income women." She also claims that most pregnant women who claim financial hardship as their reason for abortion are already parents so they know how expensive it is to raise a child.

Now for the economic reasons. According to the 2004 article "The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States" written by William Thompson and Joseph Hickey, the "working class" and "lower class" make up more than fifty percent of the United States. More than half of US households are living paycheck to paycheck. That means if they are given any money it will be spent. Money's entire purpose is to be spent. Money only has value when it is spent. The more money in circulation, the better for the economy. Also as the working class tends to live in smaller towns, that means the money would be spent locally and less likely to be given to chain stores where it would do exactly what I claimed devalues money: sit in an account somewhere, never to be spent.

Finally, I have to address the most common argument against a UBI and probably the most unfounded: having a Universal Basic Income would encourage people to not work. This claim is illogical. We are not giving every single person $50,000 a year, or even $20,000. We are giving them enough that they don't have to worry about starving or not having the money to pay for gas/public transit so they can get to their job. No one chooses to live paycheck to paycheck. A Universal Basic Income would make Americans work harder because they wouldn't be working five jobs just to survive. This change would make Americans able to dedicate themselves to one or two professions, creating more ideas and room for growth than someone who barely has the energy to show up. In an article by Joshua Howegogo at NewScientist, he talked about a recent experiment in Finland. He said, "Recent analysis of public records from the time showed that it was only young men and young women who spent less time in work during the trial, and this because they were either in college or looking after babies. " People confuse a UBI with unemployment, which goes away once you get a job. Everyone will receive the UBI, regardless of income and employment status.

In my opinion, the only valid issue with a UBI is figuring out how to fund it, which is not something I am currently qualified to discuss. It's also outside of the scope of this article. To put forth my idea simply, if properly funded, a UBI would revitalize our country's economy, workforce, and quality of life. It would allow people to focus on productive jobs, not just cog in the machine jobs that will soon be automated. It would allow more people to invest in education. It would lift American citizens above the poverty line, a step to making this country truly great.

Here are links to the articles and works I mentioned in this article.

ARicherYou

"Abortion in the Lives of Women Struggling Financially: Why Insurance Coverage Matters"

The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States

NewScientist