Gads, that was OT for this room. Politics & Paranoia>...
It should be done Friedman-style as some negative income tax, so people earning more than X$ would not benefit from the program. The more you earn, the lower your basic income becomes.
Proponents of UBI assert that as technology makes production more efficient, employment shortage is inevitable. As a result, UBI keeps the population alive by providing a guaranteed minimum income for everyone regardless of employment. Some also argue that UBI has far less overhead to manage compared to the existing implementation of a welfare state, which in theory is true.
One must call into question, however, what happens when we exit the realm of theory and actually put it into practice. My favorite comparison is college tuition. The more the government subsidizes our colleges and universities, the more tuition ends up costing. There has to be an economic reality somewhere causing this. Another comparison could be the higher cost of medical services for self-pay compared to insurance. In both examples, costs are shifted to where there are buckets of money available.
(Disclaimer: I don't speak like an economist because I'm not one. But I'm way smarter than Krugman.)
So it can be argued that if a Universal Basic Income is provided, at the expense of taxing those who actually produce something, then the cost of goods and services will increase to compensate for it. This in turn makes the required amount of Universal Basic Income increase, and the end result is rapid inflation followed by economic collapse.
Well, the problem with medicine, and the problem with education, as far as escalating expenses go, appears to be similar... at least it seems that way to me.
The underlying cause is a lack of competition for the resources required to provide education or medicine. The lack of competition frees those who provide such resources to charge whatever they want (yes, I'm looking at you, Shkreli).
If the market adjust to provide competition for these resources, escalating expenses will evaporate, and all these other weird half-measures need not exist.
I like to undermine education costs by proving you can teach yourself an awful lot of stuff if you're determined.
That and prestige. Everyone wants to go to the nice schools, they can get the good loans to let them do it, the school will give enough financial aid to make it possible, so the negotiation becomes "how much can you possibly afford? At the very limit? OK, give it to us."
Many kids would be much better served by a technical school or something a little more local...
And yes, quite a lot of kids would do better with tech school or something similar.
The goal should be: go into the world having a marketable skill.
(A hundred grand of debt and the ability to tell people to check their privilege, is not a marketable skill.)
ITT closed its doors due to the throngs of people not attending their classes?
No... I think it was government policy changes that killed them. They were not willing to spend the money to jump through some bullshit hoop the government forced on them, so they closed up shop instead.
Because the government actually listens to industry.
ITT had a few issues. They were having an issue with low graduation rates compared to the enrollment numbers.
Though I wonder if this is more a matter of the clientele that they were targeting. Working Adults aren't always able to dedicate enough time to get through a degree. They have other things going on that take time away or make it hard. I went back to get my degree when I was in my early 30s. If I had waited till two years ago instead, I would have had to drop out due to real life throwing too many things in my direction that had to be dealt with. I wonder what the demographic looks like in a traditional university when you look at similar age groups, and pull out all the early 20 year olds who are just going to school and not working to put themselves through school, and pay the bills, etc.
The Obama administration had a thing about For-Profit schools, and was constantly attacking the big ones. Sometimes rightfully so, sometimes not so much. This caused ITT to have to spend lots of money on lawyers and defending themselves. There was also a movement by the Obama administration to take back money paid to the school when a student dropped out.
At least that was what was reported in the local papers about ITT.
It's fair for the government to think twice about providing govt money to for-profit schools. Apparently the withdrawal of the gravy train is what killed ITT, so maybe they just deserved to die.
Having put one through college and another in right now, I've seen how much waste there is first hand.
2017-03-11 13:51 from IGnatius T Foobar
Knowing where your older one went to college, I'm surprised she didn't
come home verbally assaulting you for being white and male.
She came out relatively unscathed.