Friday, May 26, 2017

David F. Ruccio — “We need people to go to work”

Emily Badger is right:
 "The new White House budget proposal is built on a deep-rooted conservative belief: The government should help those who are willing to work, and cull from benefit rolls those who aren’t."
But it’s also a deep-rooted liberal belief. Lest we forget, it was Bill Clinton who signed the original let-them-work-or-starve welfare reform in 1996 (two years after signing the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the largest crime bill in history).*
There is not much difference between conservatism and bourgeois liberalism. Two sides of the same coin, as Clinton, Blair, and Obama proved.

The fallacy of substituting workfare for welfare is several fold. First, there have to be enough jobs which there likely won't be without a job guarantee. Secondly, as Ruccio points out, many of the job will pay below the subsistence level so that government has to subsidize employers that don't pay a living wage and whose business plan includes this as a policy. Sam Walton, I am thinking of you.*

* "I pay low wages. I can take advantage of that. We're going to be successful, but the basis is a very low-wage, low-benefit model of employment."
— Attributed in Adam L. Penenberg, "Why Google Is Like Wal-Mart", Wired, 21 April 2005 (Wikiquote)

Occasional Links & Commentary
“We need people to go to work”
David F. Ruccio | Professor of Economics, University of Notre Dame

See also
Zuckerberg said that, because he knew he had a safety net if projects like Facebook had failed, he was confident enough to continue on without fear of failing. Others, he said, such as children who need to support households instead of poking away on computers learning how to code, don't have the foundation Zuckerberg had. Universal basic income would provide that sort of cushion, Zuckerberg argued.
Altman's view is similar. A year ago, Altman said he thinks "everyone should have enough money to meet their basic needs—no matter what, especially if there are enough resources to make it possible. We don't yet know how it should look or how to pay for it, but basic income seems a promising way to do this." Altman believes basic income will be possible as technological advancements "generate an abundance of resources" that help decrease the cost of living.

8 comments:

Matt Franko said...

"as technological advancements "generate an abundance of resources"

We already have had that (in real terms) for quite a long time...

djrichard said...

But, but, but ... the deficit.

By making the deficit an issue, Congress gets to pick winners and more importantly, gets to pick losers. What's not to like?

John said...

So more of the same anti-working class neoliberalism. How much more can the American working-class take? And this time round the pimp will be an obese orange fraudster who wonders out loud whether it is wrong to be sexually attracted to his own daughter. I suppose a war may divert attention for as long as it takes for Drumpf to line his pockets with dodgy deals with jihadi gangster petro-states.

Penguin pop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Penguin pop said...

John, that's exactly what Chump is doing. Turning the presidency into a get rich quick scheme when he faces so much political gridlock. Then he'll make up a nonsensical excuse to conveniently resign and leave us with Mike Pence and then go on to make even more munnie in the private sector, never facing a day in prison for his bullshit. He's a wannabe oligarch who fooled a bunch of peons into thinking he's for the little guy with his faux populism.

Neil Wilson said...

If Zuckerberg wants to give everybody a basic income, should he start writing the cheques. After all somebody has to give up their carrots to give to those not prepared to contribute. Why not the tech millionaires?

He who brays it, pays it.

Noah Way said...

@John & Penguin: Trump is just following a long line of tricksters and self-promoters trying to cash in. The Clintons went from leaving the White House "dead broke" to a net worth > $100m. War criminal BO got a $65m book deal and is raking in $400k per speech from the Wall St. crooks he protected from investigation and prosecution. Insider trading is illegal *unless* you are a member of congress. And so on. Don't let your revulsion of Trump blind you to the corruption of the entire system. He is just the inevitable result.

Steve D said...

Peng: Stop it! I believe Franco has a copyright on "munnie." (: