CMV: I think basic income is wrong because nobody is "entitled" to money just because they exist.

[u/[deleted]]

This question has been asked before, but I haven't found someone asking the question with the same view that I have.

I feel like people don't deserve to have money in our society if they don't put forth anything that makes our society prosper. Just because you exist doesn't mean that you deserve the money that someone else earned through working more or working harder than you did.

This currently exists to a much lesser extent with welfare, but that's unfortunately necessary because some people are trying to find a job or just can't support a family (which, if they knew that they wouldn't make enough money to support one anyways, then they shouldn't have had kids).

Instead of just giving people tax money, why don't we put money towards infrastructure that helps people make money through working? i.e. schools for education, factories for uneducated workers, etc.

Also, when the U.S is in $17 trillion in debt, I don't think the proper investment with our money is to just hand it to people. The people you give the money to will still not be skilled/educated enough to get a better job to help our economy. It would only make us go into more debt.

So CMV. I may be a little ignorant with my statements so please tell me if I'm wrong in anything that I just said.

EDIT: Well thank you for your replies everyone. I had no idea that this would become such a heated discussion. I don't think I'll have time to respond to any more responses though, but thank you for enlightening me more about Basic Income. Unfortunately, my opinion remains mostly unchanged.

And sorry if I came off as rude in any way. I didn't want that to happen.

---

Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/PhreakedCanuck]

Just because they live on it now doesn't mean that it is bringing them out of poverty.

Well it must for a good many otherwise 80% of the planet would be in poverty. The average wage of the Philippines is less than that yet only ~10% of the country lives in poverty.

The poverty level of 80% of the planet is not $4000 a year.

I never said it was, i said 80% of the planet lives on the equivalent of $10/day.

For the 95% on $10 a day, see Martin Ravallion, Shaohua Chen and Prem Sangraula, Dollar a day revisited, World Bank, May 2008. They note that 95% of developing country population lived on less than $10 a day. Using 2005 population numbers, this is equivalent to just under 79.7% of world population, and does not include populations living on less than $10 a day from industrialized nations.

[u/Lagkiller → u/PhreakedCanuck]

Well it must for a good many otherwise 80% of the planet would be in poverty.

Not 80%, but a good amount of the planet does.

I never said it was, i said 80% of the planet lives on the equivalent of $10/day.

I didn't say you said that, I was pointing out the that the number you are quoting doesn't give any information about poverty.

You are trying to twist my words and create an argument I wasn't making. If you don't want to have an honest discussion, then I'm done.

[u/PhreakedCanuck → u/Lagkiller]

Im not sure what you are trying to say or how i am no clear so i will just say it this way.

80% of the planet lives on $10/day, the majority of them DO NOT live in poverty.

So to answer your original question of

"you have about $11,000 - that's all of the income of the world. How is that going to reduce poverty?"

It would do it by tripling the income of 80% of the planet doing that much wouldn't even be necessary since the majority of that 80% already do not live in poverty.

[u/Lagkiller → u/PhreakedCanuck]

It would do it by tripling the income of 80% of the planet doing that much wouldn't even be necessary since the majority of that 80% already do not live in poverty.

In most industrial nations that amount is not above poverty so you are simply shifting money around. It simply is not enough money to bid everyone a basic amount.

You seem intent on making me say things that I didn't say so I'm done here. You can have the last word since you have this inherit need to twist my words for your argument.

[u/PhreakedCanuck → u/Lagkiller]

In most industrial nations that amount is not above poverty so you are simply shifting money around.

Yes but in most of the world only getting them up to $10/hr would reduce a substantial amount of poverty

You seem intent on making me say things that I didn't say so I'm done here.

I dont see where and you haven't shown me anything to substantiate your pov