US Pulling Out of Paris Climate Accord

[LogGrad98]

[MENTION=3073]JustTheTip[/MENTION]

If between you and your wife the government gave your family 42k a year; would you stop working or continue to work so that you could afford an 84k lifestyle for your family?

If I remember right this is where the Switzerland vote got stymied was on the amount. That is a tough call. What would be the right amount for a basic income? 2k per month? 1k? 5? And per household or per adult? It is a complicated issue for sure, but I think it is something we will have to see at some point. Either that or more regulation on business to affect wages, which opens its own pandora's box.

 

[♪alt13]

If I remember right this is where the Switzerland vote got stymied was on the amount. That is a tough call. What would be the right amount for a basic income? 2k per month? 1k? 5? And per household or per adult? It is a complicated issue for sure, but I think it is something we will have to see at some point. Either that or more regulation on business to affect wages, which opens its own pandora's box.

I think it has to be per adult. It gets too complicated and sets up some undiserable incentives if done by household or given to children. It's probably best to deal with childhood poverty through non income programs. If we start at 18k a year we can basically eliminate "official" poverty. Most people will still want to work, but probably not overtime. Wages should increase and many current programs for the poor may no longer be necessary. For instance perhaps SLC would be closing its homeless shelter permanently rather than building 3 new ones.

 

[Siro]

Our mortgage on a 3600 sq ft 4 bed, 3 bath house in clearfield is 1400. I think something in the SLC area in a reasonably ok neighborhood, modest home, would be doable at 1200 or less with a modest down payment. We looked at houses in West Valley and other areas that were very similar to our house in clearfield for similar money. Of course right now it is a seller's market in Utah so currently they would go for more.

Not in SLC. I've been looking for a house to buy and rent out. A small house in Rose Park will cost something like 250k, which is about 1.5k a month in mortgage. If you want a decent sized house in a decent area, say Sugarhouse, then you should expect to pay 400k.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Do you own your home outright? If so when did you purchase it?

I rent. And it's only fair to add that my situation is unique. I work for my father, rent from him ($900/month) which is slightly below average for our area, and I will be getting shares in his LLC within the next few years. But still? It is possible to raise a family well on a low income.

 

[RandyForRubio]

[MENTION=3073]JustTheTip[/MENTION]

If between you and your wife the government gave your family 42k a year; would you stop working or continue to work so that you could afford an 84k lifestyle for your family?

I would keep on working, but like I said, unique situation. I love my job, and I'll own the business someday. If somebody gave me $100 million dollars, I would still be out here working 12-16 hour days. However, with my experience, most of my peers would just take the money and go travel until they're broke.

Look, I like the idea of a UBI, I just think that there are flaws to it as well. I also don't really see what our alternative is either. At the end of the day, I don't care. I'm just gonna keep on doing what I've been doing.

 

[♪alt13]

Not in SLC. I've been looking for a house to buy and rent out. A small house in Rose Park will cost something like 250k, which is about 1.5k a month in mortgage. If you want a decent sized house in a decent area, say Sugarhouse, then you should expect to pay 400k.

Yeah I wouldn't own a home in SLC if not for the housing crisis. According to Zillow it is now worth more than double what we paid.

We need a bigger house and are leaning towards renting until my oldest moves out at which point we would probably move back into our current home.

 

[infection]

The irony is, these people work that much out of necessity, not out of love for their company. Median income in the US is something like $45k. I don't know how anyone can support a family on that. If you're making $20 an hour, and in a single-income household, then you HAVE to work 60 hours a week. And some people make even less than that!

Edit: And don't get me started on the poverty line. $18k! LOL.

Up until a couple years ago I was supporting what was then a family of 5 on $50k/yr. There certainly wasn't much savings and any unexpected expenses can be really tough but we also certainly didn't live like paupers. All the years before that we lived on quite a bit less. ~8 years ago it was family of 3 on $30k with no government assistance besides Medicaid. I'm certainly not arguing that everyone should support their family on $45k.

Regarding a universal basic income, in principle I think the idea would be interesting if it replaced every other entitlement or subsidy as it may actually be cheaper and we could eliminate a lot of bureaucracy. It would probably work great for a period of time until we as a society were conditioned to it, then we'd run in to the same problems we have now and we'd talk about the need to either increase it or to start to enact more subsidies and entitlements so that people "don't starve" or "aren't homeless," etc.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I think it has to be per adult. It gets too complicated and sets up some undiserable incentives if done by household or given to children. It's probably best to deal with childhood poverty through non income programs. If we start at 18k a year we can basically eliminate "official" poverty. Most people will still want to work, but probably not overtime. Wages should increase and many current programs for the poor may no longer be necessary. For instance perhaps SLC would be closing its homeless shelter permanently rather than building 3 new ones.

At what income level would someone not receive the basic income?

 

[Siro]

At what income level would someone not receive the basic income?

None. Every adult receives it.

 

[franklin]

Not in SLC. I've been looking for a house to buy and rent out. A small house in Rose Park will cost something like 250k, which is about 1.5k a month in mortgage. If you want a decent sized house in a decent area, say Sugarhouse, then you should expect to pay 400k.

I wasn't going to butt into this one but there's a huge and very basic hole in what you're writing.

We already have UBI in essence. You are forgetting a basic economic principle: supply and demand. This whole stagnant wage stuff is nonsense to start with (and I'm sure you realize the living standard gains we've all enjoyed), but even if it weren't a UBI increase is going to do nothing but raise rent and land prices even higher and thus leaving us all at square one, except the cost of doing business and competing with other nations goes up.

We are having a Keynesian issue with "the wealth effect" being the driving decision in economic planning and I'm not sure anyone has a solution to that one. Not to be too end-of-daysish with it but nobody has figured a solution to a population that doesn't grow in perpetuity.

 

[♪alt13]

I wasn't going to butt into this one but there's a huge and very basic hole in what you're writing.

We already have UBI in essence. You are forgetting a basic economic principle: supply and demand. This whole stagnant wage stuff is nonsense to start with (and I'm sure you realize the living standard gains we've all enjoyed), but even if it weren't a UBI increase is going to do nothing but raise rent and land prices even higher and thus leaving us all at square one, except the cost of doing business and competing with other nations goes up.

We are having a Keynesian issue with "the wealth effect" being the driving decision in economic planning and I'm not sure anyone has a solution to that one. Not to be too end-of-daysish with it but nobody has figured a solution to a population that doesn't grow in perpetuity.

No

Supply and demand are not static(except in the case of land, still only kinda). Supply adjusts itself to demand. More often than not increased demand actually leads to decreased prices over the long run as the per unit cost of production decreases.

The current housing shortage along the Wasatch Front is due to pent up demand, in migration, bad zoning laws that restrict supply, a construction labor shortage as fewer people enter that field and Latin American immigration dries up, and in the case of SLC an increasingly nasty commute from the suburbs. It isn't because Utahns are making a lot more money per person.

 

[franklin]

No

Supply and demand are not static(except in the case of land, still only kinda). Supply adjusts itself to demand. More often than not increased demand actually leads to decreased prices over the long run as the per unit cost of production decreases.

The current housing shortage along the Wasatch Front is due to pent up demand, in migration, bad zoning laws that restrict supply, a construction labor shortage as fewer people enter that field and Latin American immigration dries up, and in the case of SLC an increasingly nasty commute from the suburbs. It isn't because Utahns are making a lot more money per person.