There’s a proposal around that’s got a lot of interest called universal basic income
where everybody is guaranteed at least a certain level of income in the society.
Some free market economists like Milton Friedman talked about a negative income tax which in
effect had the same features of guaranteeing a certain level of income for everybody as
a base.
I think from a human rights and decency standard there’s a lot of sense to the idea that
everybody in a society should be able to meet their basic needs.
There’s on the other hand this sense if you give someone a check whether they’re
trying, not trying, working, not working.
If there’s no effort, no conditionality involved at all maybe we’re going to get
a lot of people that are absolutely doing nothing on the backs of those who are really
working.
So the incentive issues are real even if the sensitivity and decency issues are also real.
I think that one way to handle this is a little bit more rounded rather than seeing a universal
basic income as a check and kind of an unconditional check that’s just handed out as income.
I like the idea of social democracy as it’s applied in real countries in Europe, the Netherlands
and Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Germany.
The idea is everybody has access to publicly financed healthcare.
Everybody has access to quality publicly financed education including college tuitions.
Not a trillion dollars of crushing student debt, but tuitions paid for.
Everybody has access to not only guaranteed vacation, but paid vacation.
Everybody has access to quality childcare so that moms can go to work knowing that their
kids are in a healthy, nurturing environment.
Everybody has access to maternity leave so that moms and also paternity leave, dads can
stay home with their kids for several months.
It’s kind of decent where you say we have all this wonderful technology, this wealth.
Why don’t we live decently, not miserably.
If people want a market income beyond that they’ve got to go work for it.
If, of course, they’re disabled or for some reason can’t then there’s added social
support but it’s not cash in people’s pockets.
It’s decency.
It’s public service.
It’s basic needs met.
I see it as basically living decent lives in decent societies.
They have a very different spirit to them.
There aren’t a lot of super rich Wall Street hedge fund misanthropes – and I’ll use
the term advisably because I find a lot of people on Wall Street don’t give a damn
about anybody else except they care about their money.
And I find that really weird.
But you don’t find that kind of idea in northern Europe because it’s really looked
down upon.
And people don’t like it when people are money grubbing.
They’re kind of shunned.
So the social ethos is different.
I remember once I was running to the airport in Oslo and I fly business class and I’m
constantly moving around on trips relentlessly around the world.
And I ran up and said, “Where’s the business class line to board?”
And the guy looked at me like I was crazy and he said, “Excuse me, we’re boarding
the Scandinavian way.
Get back in line.”
And I just thought okay, that’s pretty cool actually, you know.
Everybody’s in line and let’s all get on the plane.
It’s a social spirit.
It’s the idea that we like – well by the way this is not people tearing their clothes
and living in hair shirts and not enjoying themselves.
They like their vacations.
They like their boats in the Stockholm archipelago.
They like six weeks on their island.
So they live beautifully.
But they don’t want gazillions.
They don’t want to do it at the expense of others.
They want to do it as a society.
God, if America could just get a little of that back rather than a president who believes
in killers and losers.
Sick, but that’s what we got and that is what’s degrading American society.
Not just the technical issues.
Not just the rising inequality but this spirit that you’re a winner or you’re a loser.
And if you’re a loser get out of the way.
That’s Ayn Rand talking.
It’s ugly and we’ve had enough of it.