Meritocracy is another logical argument in favor of basic income. It begins with a premise that it is logical and just to allow individuals to succeed or fail based on their actions. It is rational that those who make smart decisions and take good actions should succeed in their goals, and that those who fail to do so should not be successful. When considering this principle in the context of capitalism, a UBI may be the only way to guarantee a situation even remotely similar to a meritocracy. In capitalism, people attempt to acquire needed goods and services by trading. Those who are successful do so by making favorable exchanges. However, this system fails when individuals have no resources with which to begin making exchanges. If an individual
…show more content…
The argument follows that the federal deficit is already massive and that too much additional spending will force the US federal government to default on its credit payments and go bankrupt. However, this argument fails at several levels. First of all, the federal debt level is already increasing at one trillion dollars per year (“Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2015”). The federal government has yet to go bankrupt, and nobody seems able to identify the point at which the government will be in too much debt. Spending already exceeds revenue, and GDP is a rather poor factor when considering the federal government’s ability to pay off its debt. There is really no reason to suspect that the federal government is about to go bankrupt. Furthermore, the funding currently spent on programs for which a basic income would eliminate the need, like social security and medicaid, could pay for up to three quarters of a UBI. Based on population data from the United States Census Bureau, a UBI of $13 thousand paid to all Americans over 21 would cost approximately $3 trillion annually (“QuickFacts United States”). By eliminating current welfare programs, the federal government would save $2.294 trillion (“Policy Basics: Where Do Our Federal Tax Dollars Go?”). While this still leaves a deficit, US GDP, and by extension government revenue, is projected by OECD Data to increase at an annual rate around 2.5 percent while the population is only expected to grow at about eight tenths of a percent annually according to the U.S. Census Bureau (“Real GDP Forecast”, Colby and Ortman). This means that the ability for the government to fund a UBI will increase faster than the cost, eventually reaching the point of financial solvency in around twenty years. Thus, a basic income would not be nearly the financial burden upon the government
The argument follows that the federal deficit is already massive and that too much additional spending will force the US federal government to default on its credit payments and go bankrupt. However, this argument fails at several levels. First of all, the federal debt level is already increasing at one trillion dollars per year (“Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2015”). The federal government has yet to go bankrupt, and nobody seems able to identify the point at which the government will be in too much debt. Spending already exceeds revenue, and GDP is a rather poor factor when considering the federal government’s ability to pay off its debt. There is really no reason to suspect that the federal government is about to go bankrupt. Furthermore, the funding currently spent on programs for which a basic income would eliminate the need, like social security and medicaid, could pay for up to three quarters of a UBI. Based on population data from the United States Census Bureau, a UBI of $13 thousand paid to all Americans over 21 would cost approximately $3 trillion annually (“QuickFacts United States”). By eliminating current welfare programs, the federal government would save $2.294 trillion (“Policy Basics: Where Do Our Federal Tax Dollars Go?”). While this still leaves a deficit, US GDP, and by extension government revenue, is projected by OECD Data to increase at an annual rate around 2.5 percent while the population is only expected to grow at about eight tenths of a percent annually according to the U.S. Census Bureau (“Real GDP Forecast”, Colby and Ortman). This means that the ability for the government to fund a UBI will increase faster than the cost, eventually reaching the point of financial solvency in around twenty years. Thus, a basic income would not be nearly the financial burden upon the government