Since he was talking about Walmart, liberals, and Medicaid, I took the context as the US, where few call themselves socialists, and liberals usually protest loudly when they are.
Any prominent US liberals calling for a basic income guarantee, and in particular, as an alternative and not an add on to the regulatory welfare state?
Since he was talking about Walmart, liberals, and Medicaid, I took the context as the US, where few call themselves socialists, and liberals usually protest loudly when they are.
What I’m telling you is that the BIG is a policy that has been loudly lauded, not merely by run-of-the-mill progressives, but by people so far left they happily call themselves socialists.
Any prominent US liberals calling for a basic income guarantee, and in particular, as an alternative and not an add on to the regulatory welfare state?
Liberal pundits tend to have considerably more political power than libertarians and so don’t spend a lot of time calling for remaking the entire US social welfare system from the ground up. And they tend to think the ongoing existence of people living in poverty is a bigger priority than shrinking the government regulatory state. But they certainly show willingness to replace some government programs while implementing a BIG and discuss it positively as an alternative to other means of alleviating poverty for exactly the same reason libertarians like it.
If you read the articles you cite, you’d see that they refer primarily to Charles Murray and Milton Friedman.
The only reference to a prominent US liberal I see is one to Martin Luther King Jr.
It would be great if more liberals got on the train, but from your comments, they’re not really on board.
And they tend to think the ongoing existence of people living in poverty is a bigger priority than shrinking the government regulatory state.
Problem is, if they’re of the disposition to meddle in people’s lives, it seems unlikely that the poor will be left out of their tender ministrations. Keeping the current punitive welfare programs intact would keep all the perverse incentives, but at a higher benefit level, making for an even larger trapped and dependent class.
If you read the articles you cite, you’d see that they refer primarily to Charles Murray and Milton Friedman.
The articles I cite were written by progressive pundits. And the biggest organization dedicated to it is mostly made up of socialist academics.
The percentage of self-identified libertarians who support a basic income guarantee is certainly higher than the percentage of liberals who support a basic income guarantee. Hell, it’s probably higher than the percentage of liberals who have heard of a basic income guarantee. I don’t even know that that is indicative of some special trait about libertarians—not having any political power or influence makes it much easier to defend only the best ideas. But if you want to claim victory for your tribe, no one will stop you.
Libertarians 1, Progressives 0! Go Greens! Down with the Blues!
Problem is, if they’re of the disposition to meddle in people’s lives, it seems unlikely that the poor will be left out of their tender ministrations. Keeping the current punitive welfare programs intact would keep all the perverse incentives, but at a higher benefit level, making for an even larger trapped and dependent class.
Since he was talking about Walmart, liberals, and Medicaid, I took the context as the US, where few call themselves socialists, and liberals usually protest loudly when they are.
Any prominent US liberals calling for a basic income guarantee, and in particular, as an alternative and not an add on to the regulatory welfare state?
What I’m telling you is that the BIG is a policy that has been loudly lauded, not merely by run-of-the-mill progressives, but by people so far left they happily call themselves socialists.
Read the list of people involved with The U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network and tell me it is a libertarian stronghold.
Liberal pundits tend to have considerably more political power than libertarians and so don’t spend a lot of time calling for remaking the entire US social welfare system from the ground up. And they tend to think the ongoing existence of people living in poverty is a bigger priority than shrinking the government regulatory state. But they certainly show willingness to replace some government programs while implementing a BIG and discuss it positively as an alternative to other means of alleviating poverty for exactly the same reason libertarians like it.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/02/17/guaranteed_basic_income_the_real_alternative_to_the_minimum_wage.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/08/obama-doesnt-want-to-just-write-welfare-recipients-checks-but-what-if-we-did/
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/10/how-to-cut-the-poverty-rate-in-half-its-easy/280971/
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/23/business/23scene.html
If you read the articles you cite, you’d see that they refer primarily to Charles Murray and Milton Friedman.
The only reference to a prominent US liberal I see is one to Martin Luther King Jr.
It would be great if more liberals got on the train, but from your comments, they’re not really on board.
Problem is, if they’re of the disposition to meddle in people’s lives, it seems unlikely that the poor will be left out of their tender ministrations. Keeping the current punitive welfare programs intact would keep all the perverse incentives, but at a higher benefit level, making for an even larger trapped and dependent class.
The articles I cite were written by progressive pundits. And the biggest organization dedicated to it is mostly made up of socialist academics.
The percentage of self-identified libertarians who support a basic income guarantee is certainly higher than the percentage of liberals who support a basic income guarantee. Hell, it’s probably higher than the percentage of liberals who have heard of a basic income guarantee. I don’t even know that that is indicative of some special trait about libertarians—not having any political power or influence makes it much easier to defend only the best ideas. But if you want to claim victory for your tribe, no one will stop you.
Libertarians 1, Progressives 0! Go Greens! Down with the Blues!
I already agree with you.
I’m a socialist and I support Basic Income Guarantee. Jack has social proof now.
How nice for him.
It’s not proof of anything I was asking for, unless you’re some particularly prominent US liberal behind your username.