Can someone explain to me how basic income would improve society

I remember seeing material for basic income from Switzerland which seemed to focus entirely on being lazy. Shit like "what would you do if you didn't have to work?"
Minimum basic income is a get rich quick scheme for liberals, except you're still poor even if it works.

>>1470983

Admittedly, in a socialist country, it could work out (though you would run into the trouble of people not wanting to do manual labor jobs). In a free country, government subsidized housing is not common enough for landlords to not violate you but good.

File: poverty.jpg (57KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 480x480px

>>1470975
>The guy down the street who didn't raise his rent would be able to screen better renting applicants, have lower vacancy, lower turnover etc because he has more people applying to rent his more affordably priced property

Now, as to how it would improve society, it would get rid of so much government largess. Get rid of welfare, affordable housing, foodstamps, and all the other government bloat-fests that contribute to them spending $87K per family of four to "combat poverty". The government doesn't understand that they are actually SUBSIDIZING poverty. If the government subsidizes(essentially pays) farmers to grow corn, they get more corn. When the government pays poor people to have more poor babies, they are subsidizing and increasing poverty. Basic income helps to combat that nonsense.

>>1471082

>guy down the street gets more unemployed individuals whose time is not occupied by work
>lower quality
>lesser educated
>more likely to be involved in criminality and drugs due to idle time
>sending 87K to one family

Each family would get the poverty line, encouraging bloating of their family and then abuse or neglect of those children.

Just a reminder that even hella $$$ jobs like airplane pilot are going to get automatized and we need some kind of solution

>>1471480

Aside from sabotage of the means of large scale automation or the outlaw thereof on a worldwide scale, the only solution is a reduction of population.

>>1471504
>this is what wagecucks believe
shame

>>1470975
Unconditional basic income would NOT improve society. It's essentially welfare given to the rich.

There's a reason we don't give welfare to people earning above a certain amount.
>Economy slows down
>People earn less
>More people get more welfare
>More money to spend
>Economy picks up
>People earn more
>Fewer people get less welfare
>Less money to spend
Welfare (like our tax systems) stabilises the business cycle in this manner. It's counter-cyclical policy that kicks in regardless of which idiots we've elected to Congress/Parliament.

One-off fiscal stimulus in the form of cash handouts can work in some situations (when the economy is severely underemployed, as it has been for years now) but is not suitable as a permanent policy because during booms it would bring serious inflationary pressures.

Of course, UBI as a negative income tax could be a different story, but that's essentially a form of means tested welfare. It's not really what I would consider an unconditional basic income.

If you want a real silver bullet for poverty, look at a "government as employer-of-last-resort" scheme (federal job guarantee). Essentially it takes the unemployed, underemployed, and out of workforce labour we currently waste and gives them the option to work for minimum wage. People can transition in and out of the scheme as private sector jobs come and go, automatically maintaining full employment through boom and bust.

>>1471480
Ultimately it doesn't matter, just gotta make sure you make bank now so your bloodline can live comfortably in the future. Social and financial upward mobility seems like it's going to go extinct in the future.