Stereotypes Do Not Guarantee Prosperity
Guaranteed Incomes Do Not Guarantee Prosperity The one moral lesson that trumped the others in grade school was definitely, “Sharing is caring.” The ability to share with others treasured toys and food indicated selflessness and a readiness to plunge into a society in which citizens must all play a part. However, when applied to the actual society and economy, this method of distributing wealth is simply overly idealistic. Society sees itself split into classes with crevices always widening, as the well-known phrase states that the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. With social welfare programs and taxes, the attempts to unify the diverse population have improved the situation drastically, and simultaneously, various
…show more content…
Despite being a conservative, Charles Murray sees the merits in a universal basic income, and argues for such a system in place of the existing in his article, “A Guaranteed Income for Every American.” Murray even outlines a tentative plan for a provided annual …show more content…
He concedes to the high possibility of encouraged laziness or unwillingness to work and admits to the truth of this statement. However, he dismisses the concern with the mere response that “[laziness] is already a problem”. His way of thinking is erroneous. Since a problem already exists, adding to it is not an option; that would only make it worse. Before blindly accepting that this issue will never be resolved, various indicators regarding the working force in the United States should be examined. The current unemployment rate has risen to 4.7% as of December of 2016 (“Bureau of Labor”). Put into perspective, that makes 7,529,000 citizens in the United States without a job who are currently seeking one. Relatively speaking, the unemployment rate is considered healthy since it is under 5%, and with our efforts to supply more jobs to the market, the unemployment rate had been decreasing up until the time from November to December, albeit a tiny increase of .1%. The unemployment rate is rising already without a guaranteed income, so the likelihood of it increasing even more when there is no longer a necessity to work becomes even more concerning for economists. Yet, when examining another economic indicator, the labor force participation rate, which is the percentage of Americans over 16 who are employed and including those who are looking
Despite being a conservative, Charles Murray sees the merits in a universal basic income, and argues for such a system in place of the existing in his article, “A Guaranteed Income for Every American.” Murray even outlines a tentative plan for a provided annual …show more content…
He concedes to the high possibility of encouraged laziness or unwillingness to work and admits to the truth of this statement. However, he dismisses the concern with the mere response that “[laziness] is already a problem”. His way of thinking is erroneous. Since a problem already exists, adding to it is not an option; that would only make it worse. Before blindly accepting that this issue will never be resolved, various indicators regarding the working force in the United States should be examined. The current unemployment rate has risen to 4.7% as of December of 2016 (“Bureau of Labor”). Put into perspective, that makes 7,529,000 citizens in the United States without a job who are currently seeking one. Relatively speaking, the unemployment rate is considered healthy since it is under 5%, and with our efforts to supply more jobs to the market, the unemployment rate had been decreasing up until the time from November to December, albeit a tiny increase of .1%. The unemployment rate is rising already without a guaranteed income, so the likelihood of it increasing even more when there is no longer a necessity to work becomes even more concerning for economists. Yet, when examining another economic indicator, the labor force participation rate, which is the percentage of Americans over 16 who are employed and including those who are looking