What Will Cause The Next Recession – Paul Krugman On UBI And More
Articles

What Will Cause The Next Recession – Paul Krugman On UBI And More


I’m not a UBI guy.
Not now.
And the reason is basically,
it’s a lot of money.
And given that there are
constraints, political constraints on how
much money we’re going to be
able to get together for social
programs. Trouble with UBI is that
either it’s going to cost an
amount that’s beyond what I expect
is to be politically possible
and in the next several decades. Or
it’s going to be way inadequate.
And so more targeted programs, programs
that that focus on people with
real needs and that includes
everything from of course universal
health care, which we can should do
right away one way or another, to
various kinds of income supports for
families with children and so
on. There’s a whole lot.
If you ask what we can do
with a sum substantially less than
UBI would cost, it’s a lot.
And to say well no
we must have UBI.
That would only make sense if we were
right on the verge of the point
where the robots take all of our
jobs and that doesn’t look, there’s
no sign that
that’s actually happening.
A starting point is finish the job
that the, that the Affordable Care Act began.
Now, I would I’m, I’m very enthusiastic
about this new proposal to ACA 2.0 to reinforce it.
That’s not the that’s
not the end point.
I mean, I’m a I’m a Medicare
for America guy which is Medicare is
available to everyone but you can
also keep private insurance but
something like that.
But start with that.
We need aid to families,
we need child care.
Universal child care is it’s something
that it’s crazy not to have
given what it means
for the country’s future.
There’s a there’s a list of things
you start to add up things that
are huge benefits to America that would
cost a few percent to GDP.
And that’s a significant but not crushing
sum and we should just do
them.
You could have a very extensive
progressive agenda for no more than
the amount of money that a
Republican Congress just blew out a
completely pointless tax cut.
Right now two trillion dollars over the
next 10 years would buy you a
lot of social progress.
So, let’s start from there.
Anything up to that point, I would
say let’s not even worry about
where the money is coming from.
If we’re going to have a
recession, it’s gonna be a smorgasbord
recession. It’s going to be no one
thing but just a bunch of different things.
I mean short run economic forecasting
is a is a black art.
Nobody does it very well.
For what it’s worth.
People who are tracking are
feeling moderately depressed right now.
They’re seeing slow growth right now
and the markets, the bond market
is acting as if there’s a pretty
good chance of a recession sometime
in the next year or
so but who knows.
There are all kinds of things
that could be going wrong.
China is clearly struggling.
Europe may very well actually already
be in recession. They probably
are suffering the deflation of the
tech bubble, corporate debt has
gotten it. I’ve been saying there’s no
one thing this is if we’re
going to have a recession it’s
going to be a smorgasbord recession.
It said now that our economy is
the strongest it’s ever been in the
history of our country.
Well even even his
own numbers, right?
I mean it’s not.
He’s been boasting about the greatest
economy ever and it’s actually
turns out that we’ve had the
highest growth rate since 2015.
Right? It’s not
it’s not exceptional.
What we’ve been seeing is just kind
of in the normal range of
fluctuations.
People don’t live on GDP.
People live on their paychecks
and paychecks have not at
best kept slightly ahead of
inflation and not even that.
And that’s for a long time.
People… So, you say whatever, whatever
people may say about the
growth number, the fact that the
matter is people are looking and
saying I don’t feel like it’s any
easier to pay my bills this year
than it was last year.
The absence of faster wage
growth despite low unemployment is
something of a mystery.
But you know the
economy is always changing.
The way we measure the unemployment rate
is always the same but what it means
in terms of how tight our labor markets, how much bargaining power workers have.
That can change a lot depending on
what the economy is like and it
looks as if we have an economy
right now where between
and maybe factors we just don’t understand, what
looks like a historically low
unemployment rate isn’t actually translating
into the kind of
bargaining power that workers
used to have.
I actually think that the answer
to what will replace unions is
unions.
In the end, something like organized
you know if union means organized
labor that is able to bargain
collectively, there’s a reason that we
hit upon that solution and it’s a
solution that we managed to lose a lot of.
Largely because of a
political environment that’s hostile.
I mean we…unions are a very small factor in the U.S. economy right now.
But you know there’s two thirds
of the workforce in Scandinavia.
So there’s nothing about the 21st
century that says that you can’t have extensive unionization.
America has made policy choices that
have led to low unionization.
Policy choices can change.
Denmark is absolutely as exposed to
the winds of global competition as America is.
Two thirds of them are in unions.
And remember also most of our economy
by the way is services which
are not traded at all.
So no this is, this is an
excuse. We made we made the decision
not to have unions in America.
We didn’t lose them
because they became obsolete.
The whole question of income inequality
and growth is a very tortured
one. It’s not one with
a simple or clear answer.
Income inequality at the bottom means
that a lot of children don’t
get the essential nutrition, health care
or other support that they
need to realize their potential.
So that’s a drag on growth.
There is some very ambiguous
evidence about whether high income
inequality is that
hurts consumer demand.
I’m not fully convinced
of it myself.
So I think the reason to be
worried about income inequality is not what it does to GDP.
The reason to be worried about income
inequality is what it does to
people, which is ultimately
what we care about.
We have what amounts
to controlled experiments.
We know what happened when
food stamps were brought in.
We know what happened when Medicaid
was brought in because those were
both programs that didn’t go into
effect all across America at the same time.
They rolled out across the
country and we can look.
We have what amounts to an experiment
in what happens to children who
did get nutritional aid when
they were very small.
What happens to children who did
get adequate medical care compared
with those who did not.
And 20, 30 years later, they
are more productive, they are healthier
more productive, more successful
citizens of our society.
So there’s no question that alleviating
hardship at the bottom is
good not just for the individual but
for, for the broader society and for the economy.
So we now have a large part
of the influential elite in the United
States that has simply opted
out of public schooling.
That has to be really
bad for social cohesion.
And so those are the sorts of things
I think that you really want to
worry about on inequality.
Beyond just adequacy of
material standard of living.
Are we a society or are we not?
And increasingly here we are not.
Look, if we take the extreme.
The Cuba at the height of Castro’s
regime, where your income was the
same regardless of what you did.
You can’t be a card carrying economist
and not believe that that has
some adverse incentive effects.
But the notion that we are that,
this is a prime concern in
America right now, it’s just
not supported by the evidence.
And look I would say when we talk
about tax rates it turns out that
if you are a person who lives in
New York City and earns your income
through wages and salary but
you have a high salary.
So you’re a highly
paid New York person.
You probably pay 55 to 60 cents
of each additional dollar you make
in extra taxes.
So we have a pretty high,
not as high as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
wants it to go.
Or Peter Diamond, the great
economist thinks it should go.
But we have a pretty high
marginal tax rate in New York.
Does the city out here look to you
like a place where people you know
just don’t really work very hard
because taxes are too high?
It doesn’t strike me that way.
So I think we have a pretty
good pretty good evidence that the
incentive effects in America right now
are not something to be
worried about.
I think it’s one of those
any anything to prescribe any
kind of progressive in some sense social
policy they’ll find a way to
make it sound like an ugly thing and
I think that I think the reason
that redistribution.
managed to acquire a bad resonance
among some people is that they’ve
managed to convince basically convince
white people that taking your
money away and giving it
to people with darker skins.
That’s really what life that’s like
a lot of things in America.
But that’s not certainly not
what experts think that redistribution
is collecting money in taxes and using
it to finance various kinds of
social programs that tend to help
people who are more in need.
Child care, early
development crucially.
That’s crucial both for the children
and for the parents because we
live in a society where in fact
lots of people…
lots of families require two working
parents or you have single parents who must work.
And I’m not violently opposed to you
know baby bond things where you
give people assets but the fact of the
matter is we are going to be
as a society in which people the
great majority of people make a
living by work, by
selling their labor.
And so trying to spread asset ownership
can help maybe a little bit
but ultimately if you want if you want
America to be a more equal or
more middle class society you have
to be increasing the rewards to
work not giving people assets.
That is a genuinely hard problem.
I spoke about that.
I’ve wrote about that.
I mean there are there
are things I know.
I think we know a lot
about how to make inequality less.
We know a lot about how to
make children’s lives better and make
their make them
more productive adults.
If you ask me what you can do,
I spent my early years in Utica, New
York. I got in trouble with the
mayor of Utica by saying some of
this. But if you ask what can we
do to actually make lots of people.
It’s a decaying industrial city.
One make lots of people want to
move back to places like Utica.
I don’t know how you do that.
There are you can try.
But the historical record of
attempts at, attempts to revive
depressed regions as opposed to helping
the people in those regions
which we do a lot of but
actually reviving them is not great.
So there are going to be there
are going gonna be parts of America
that where it made sense to
locate a lot of stuff.
Given the economy we had in 1890 and
there is not a lot of reason to
do that in the year 2020.
And if people are determined enough to
try and stay then we should
give them every opportunity that
things like broadband should be
available everywhere.
The fact that there are broadband deserts
in a lot of America is
that’s unnecessary
and unforgivable.
So I’m not giving advice to
people but we should make housing
affordable. You have an economic dynamo
like the city of New York.
It shouldn’t be a place where only
people at the 98 percentile can
afford to actually
have a place to live.

100 Comments

  • HealthyMealthy

    This guy has been wrong about the US, China, Venezuela, and so many other topics. Economics is such a speculative subject.

  • HealthyMealthy

    We used to be a country where a single income could support a house, a wife, and three children.

    Now, two incomes can barely keep up with living expenses.

  • WilliamOccamensis

    We already have UBI, for people over 65. Here in Canada, there is the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), which you pay into and get benefits in proportion to contributions, Old Age Supplement (OAS), which everyone gets, and Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), which brings pension income up to the poverty line. If you make money after you retire, some or all of the OAS+GIS is clawed back at tax time. So that's how you pay for it: some through a payroll tax, some from general tax revenue, some from clawbacks.

    The advantage is that it reduces bureaucracy by eliminating patchwork programs like welfare and food stamps. Medicare for all is the same: our system is just much simpler than yours. You see your doctor, he bills the government, you pay your taxes. The end. Doctors love it because they don't have to get expensive malpractice insurance, deal with numerous insurance companies with different rules, chase after patients who don't pay, etc.

    We have Medicare for all, but we haven't yet gotten as far as pensions for all, so we haven't realized those benefits and we still have patchwork programs. There are numerous economic advantages to pensions for all: people who want a higher standard of living are still motivated to work, but are free to set up a business, do freelance work, take courses, write books, invent things, be creative, without being afraid of being left out on the street if it doesn't work out. People can veg out in front of the TV if they want, but how boring is that? Trust-fund kids who never have to work generally do find some way of keeping busy: for some reason, they are considered to deserve their unearned income, but poor people are not.

    The obstacle to GUI (and the thoery behind supply-side economics) was explained nicely by J.K. Galbraith: "The rich don't work because they have not enough money; the poor don't work because they have too much money. If you believe that, you'll believe anything."

  • soal159

    We are literally spending illusions. The interest on the debt is insane and you want to spend more. The answer is the pay your bills not add more bills. No one has committed to coverage of our commitments and everyone keeps going for broke. The united states needs a miracle to stay powerful and remedy the inevitable doom of our inflative currency. Nothing in this economy is free.

  • GOG and MAGOG

    5:24 We didn't lose unions because of politics. We lost unions because of economics.
    Unions became power hungry and used coercion to force increasingly unreasonable demands.
    Unions created the economic reality that compelled US manufacturers to abandon property,
    plants, equipment, product distribution networks and trained workers, to start from scratch
    in other countries.

  • Xcite Carnalval

    We bailed out the banks at 4+trillion but we can’t bail out our people?!? No inflation or recession still!!! The greatest minds of the world is having a great debate and most agree on a UBI. We are moving towards a world of abundant energy, quantum computers, ai and quantum ai, and super advance technology, the money system will fail in the world we are building. So tell me, how fast will quantum ai replace the new jobs we create from the new technology we make in the future??? We make jobs that will get replaced by ai faster and faster!

  • confusedone97

    What is this crap? White people are the only ones against "redistribution" … And it's because of the skin color of who money gets redistributed to? The fact this guy thinks that is a huge problem. People like this are pushing me more and more towards Yang 2020

  • John D

    If your a Male over 55 your not wanted by most employers. One your not tech savy, you cant or don't want to put in 70 hour weeks, you might get sick and your a health risk. You drive up companies health premiums.

  • John D

    My wages have slowly declined over the last 20 years. Overtime is the only thing keeping my standard of living even. Wages have not kept up

  • John D

    Income inequality, I'm sure there was a lot of equal income during the last 5000 years. More like the top 1 percent owned everything and everyone else was a slave or peasant. There has always been inequality

  • Nate LaChance

    Sovereign governments that issue their own currency cannot run out of money by definition. The 1930s and 40s proved that massive, short-term deficit spending breeds economic growth if the government spends on programs that bolster worker productivity and utilize stagnate resources.

    Anyone making the affordability argument is missing the forest for the trees. If he were to have cited inflation as his cause of concern, then that would have at least been a coherent argument.

  • laid07

    Yes, redistribution is about taking money though taxation, and then spending it on various social program. Suppose I, as a working stiff, do not wish to support these social programs? If your children go hungry because I don't wish to support them, then why/how is that my problem or responsibility?

  • Jonathan Curtis

    Ok, WHY do we care what this guy thinks? He's apparently not paying attention to the automation wave. Sure he means well, but he's old think like the rest of them.

  • mrbam88

    He's an old school establishment democrat! He would rather have the government spend our money than letting the people directly spend it! Its politics not economics with him, and honestly that's why Hillary lost! I'm with the Yang on this one! #MATH

  • Whaleshrimp

    Another Nobel Prize winning nut case! Can anyone remember this guy ever being right? These days the Nobel Prize means "just another no content puppet".

  • Mr. Akill3s

    "I'm not a UBI guy…"

    worth $2.5 Million, ALL credibility gone. Ask the middle class being eliminated if they are.

  • Mr. Akill3s

    There are book smarts and streets smarts, he is book smarts…clearly, out of touch with what exactly goes on. Get outside your room where you do studies and WITNESS the change.

  • HDiddy SD

    UBI is non-sense and we American’s are too stupid to put it to use in a meaningful way. Let’s just borrow more from the Chinese, at interest, so that everyone can have free unconditional money. Only the Chinese would think that’s a good idea.

  • sewuzy

    WHAT IS ANDREW YANG'S FREEDOM DIVIDEND

    • Yang's Freedom Dividend – UBI, of $1,000 a month to all US citizens over 18, is one of over 100 policies on Yang's website.

    • Yang's Freedom Dividend is –

    1. Needed because technology is displacing tens of millions of jobs and eliminating the income and payroll tax revenue facilitating our society.

    2. Life saving and life changing for tens of millions of impoverished, borderline, and struggling Americans suffering from the trap of scarcity, as well as liberating of government control for the average American.

    • Yang says, Every U.S. citizen over the age of 18 would receive $1,000 a month, regardless of income or employment status, free and clear.

    – It will be illegal to lend or borrow against one’s Dividend.

    – If you do not graduate from high school, your dividend does not begin until 20.

    – The Freedom Dividend benefits are opt-in, but there are no conditions such as looking for, or working at a job.

    – People who already receive social benefits can switch to receiving the Freedom Dividend in the alternative.

    – Since every adult citizen has this right, there can be no stigma attached to its benefits.

    • The Freedom Dividend is considered a universal right of citizenship as a shareholder-voter-owner to the fruits of our society's entrepreneurial wealth. Since there are no government controls or restrictions such as work requirements, control, monitoring or care as to how you spend it, this is an independent right of liberty in our capitalist society where income does not start at zero.

    https://www.yang2020.com/policies/

    • The Freedom Dividend will be excluded from taxable income.

    https://twitter.com/AndrewYang_2020/status/1135315887114936325

    • The Freedom Dividend is not limited to age 64 and will be on top of Social Security retirement income.

    https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1133788719285194755

  • sewuzy

    WON'T THE FREEDOM DIVIDEND INCREASE THE DEFICIT OR CAUSE INFLATION?

    • No, not much if at al.

    • The Fed just printed $4 trillion for the bank bail out with no inflation.

    • UBI is funded out of existing cash flow by a 10% VAT and is immediately returned to the cash flow.

    • No debt or deficit spending is involved, no money will be printed.

    • It will help grow the economy with its trickle up benefits.

  • sewuzy

    IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR YANG, YOU WILL BE THROWING AWAY $1,000 A MONTH FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, FOR YOU and FOR EACH MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY AND YOUR FRIENDS OVER 18. And it is Inflation adjusted.

    $768,000 is what an 18 year old man throws away ($12K x +64 years of 82 year life expectancy).

    $840,000 is what an 18 year old woman throws away ($12K x +70 years of 88 years life expectancy).

    That is a WHOLE LOTTA MONEY TO THROW AWAY, by voting for anyone other than Yang !

    The Freedom Dividend will be EXCLUDED FROM TAXABLE INCOME.

    https://twitter.com/AndrewYang_2020/status/1135315887114936325

    The Freedom Dividend is not limited to age 64 and will be ON TOP OF SOCIAL SECURITY RETIREMENT INCOME.

    https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1133788719285194755

    Donate $1 or $10 dollars a month to his campaign. Help him win and get $1,000 a month back for life.

    #YangGang !

  • scott v

    Paul Krugman, is wrong automation has taken jobs and more to come. Ubi is a trickle up not trickle down. Look at youtube videos on automation like self checkouts at grocery stores, manufacturing and others.

  • James Walker

    The reason housing is not affordable is because of excessive regulation which makes it unprofitable to build anything new for anyone other than the wealthy.

  • harvestcanada

    I would tie U.B.I. tax reform and universalize education, vocational and academically and have National Health Care system in America.

    Unionization is in decline, because of the lack of engagement and will to look out for our own interest.

    Individual Engagement and social autonomy is the key to social justice and attacking the exploitation of inequality.

  • Anthony Duck

    Pretty sad when people don't even see it coming. Unregulated crytocurrency is going too cause the next great depression and upend the entire economy system💯

  • Trovinizard

    7 trillion dollar war in Iraq that was pointless. LETS DO IT!!!
    3 trillion dollar UBI so every american has there basic needs covered. wHeRe WiLl tHe MoNeY CoMe FrOm!

  • pre nuptials

    Republicans like to talk days and days about job growth, but the reality is that a lot of these aren't full-time, long term, stable jobs that people stay in for 20+ years. There's more temp contract jobs more than ever, and once the economy dips that unemployment rate is going to jump with the Republicans acting confused about what just happened.

  • Lucky Cactus

    No we need to work on our culture. We need to regulate the company’s that poison our population. From the horrible food to the over prescriptions of medications . We need to instill confidence back in to the population . Support our small business men. Teach the youth that it good and profitable to be a plumber or a craftsman. Stop putting so much on health care . Let’s teach people how to be healthy to prevent sickness. Focusing on the mitigation of the symptoms of our sick broken culture dose not work.

  • tradeeagle

    UBI best idea to come along in a long time… search Andrew Yang for great cogent argument in favor…and Medicare for all is a no brainer but UBI is the place to start….

  • DeQuarrius McClinton

    Sooooo, didnt the FAA just approve Amazon flying drones. Today Apple just bought a tech company that specializes in self driving car AI. Wasnt uber test driving their AI last year . Dude it's coming.

  • Peter RONAI

    “Redistribution” has been happening for decades, but it has not been redistribution of wealth from the “haves” to the “have-nots.” It has been redistribution of wealth in the reverse direction via the tax code. And it’s not just “loopholes”… it’s built into the structure of the tax code. When corporations which make billions of dollars in annual profit pay no tax, the US must disproportionately rely on taxes on individuals. The Republican complaint that Democrats want to redistribute wealth to the less affluent is a distortion. The Democrats want to redress the injustice of the long-standing reverse redistribution of wealth to the already wealthy. Warren Buffett says that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. I rest my case.

  • Umora Mayori

    If we cut taxes, then everyone has more money in their pockets so they to decide how to spend it. Government has no business stealing money from me, to give to your neighbor. If you feel so strongly that the neighbor needs the money, YOU cut the check, and leave me out of it.

    The economic understanding of people asking for more social programs and UBI, is so catastrophically lacking that I can see why socialism is on the rise. People have forgotten basic human nature, and can't do math. That is without any consideration to the Fed and central banking.

  • bonanzatime

    🎶Never was UBI guy, thought it was a good solution🎶 Living in a UBI world🎶 This is not really happening?. This is not really happening?.🎶 Squealing like a pig now…🎶

  • sandy gibson

    UBI IS FOR THE RICH AND NOTHING FOR THE POOR ON SOCIAL SECURITY,MEDICAID OR MEDICARE,,WE NEED TO TELL ANDREW YANG NO,,WE NEED TO VOTE FOR BERNIE SANDERS,,WE NEED MEDICARE FOR ALL.

  • sandy gibson

    DONT WASTE YOUR VOTE ON ANDREW YANG,,UBI IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE WITH MITCH MCCONNEL LEADING THE SENATE,,BUT IF WE VOTE FOR BERNIE SANDERS,WE WILL GET MEDICARE FOR ALL,WHICH IS MUCH BETTER THAN UBI

  • Deng Barac

    Unless you change the way we measure the economy like a human centered capitalism, but you're not ready for that conversation.

    PS. America is overdue for a recession it's going to happen we might as well prepare the populist for it.

  • Whitey26

    No Paul, it is our turn. We bailed out wall street banks with 800 billion. We did 4 trillion of Quantitative Easening, which only benefited the top 1%. This time it will be us the majority.

  • oli godendrocyte

    do a co2 tax and give it to the people since we take all the pains while companies profit on destruction

  • William Ramos

    These people are outdated to know how the new generation works. Old folks again trying to say things when they will be gone in the next 10 years.

  • D RolyPolyMan

    Krugmans stuck in the 20th century with old outdated ideas. The Malls are shutting down and everyone is buying online. And there are stores with no clerks at all. And he doesn’t see this?
    He needs to get out more!

    And he’s predicting a Recession! God, this guy is a Killjoy! An Obama guy and worshipper! Ridiculous! And he gives Zero credit to Trump for low unemployment. What a tool! And he won the Pulitzer for Economics?

    He’s the type of guy who can talk you into a a Recession. Pathetic! Cancel the Plans for the Recession! We don’t want one now or later!

    I’m for UBI and now!

  • jim parsit

    Noble Prize is a fake, a prize of partisan and it is a corporate tool. Krugman is not in 90% of society. He does not know what he is talking about. Try homeless life for a few months that will change your mind.

  • Jason Busch

    Sorry but UBI works just ask Alaska….they have had there’s in place for about 40 years putting $1000 dollars a month in peoples hands will grow the economy… it’s called a trickle up economy

  • Jason Busch

    Once again Krugman talks about policies from the past blah blah blah blah blah….Krugman we’ve tried all that before it’s not working it’s just not….

  • Suhail Rafidi

    It's better to give the money directly to the American people, rather than give the money to programs which waste money choosing who gets money. It's a logic that inherently underestimates or mistrusts the average American. Skip the government oversight and cut checks to the citizens. Consider how much we already spend on some form of assistance to our citizens.The vast majority of people who get UBI cash are going to dump it right back into the consumer economy, spending it on medical bills, savings, tuition, car repairs, art, entrepreneurial endeavors, and occasional nights out. And think of UBI as a kind of salary for all the unpaid work people do holding our communities together, like stay at home moms and caregivers.

  • Wado Waleli

    No, Krugman is a UBP guy, with UBP meaning "Universal Basic Poverty," because that's where Fed policy, along with a totally clueless Trump Administration that has misallocated tax cuts away from the middle class and given them chiefly to the super wealthy, who don't need them, then gave us a huge proxy tax increase via the tariffs that guarantee higher costs for both business and consumers. Fed policies are now ineffective, making us very similar to Japan on the monetary side, while our corrupted legislators, incompetent and in the pockets of special interests, have worked against the interests the very people who elected them to assure us that we'll continue to spin into an India-like social structure. Adios America!

  • John THE PROPHET

    And look who is controlling the narrative, CNBC, oh wait, weren’t they the ones that turned off yangs mic #letyangspeak

  • Christian Bennet-Valentin

    No, I don't think that a UBI is the answer, in fact a UBI would be very dangerous for not just the U.S. but for the U.K. we are better off with the current system of UC.

  • (according to james)

    wait a minute, is this the same guy who said the internet would have as much historical significance as the fax machine back in the '90s lmfao

  • Matt

    I dunno trump can give a trillion in share buybacks and tax the supply chain with tariffs and its still the “best economy ever”. I think we could find away to afford it.

  • Osmo pocket Media

    When someone says they don’t want ubi that’s a different type of rich. Imagine having so much money you’re like “nah I don’t more money”

  • Austin

    I'm curious about where he gets some of his opinions.
    1) Can't UBI, even a substantial amount, be cheaper than target welfare programs? You won't have all of the excess bureaucracy for instance.
    2) He claims automation isn't taking all of the jobs, but I've seen a lot of numbers that suggest the opposite. 4 million manufacturing jobs lost recently, most job creation in the last 10 years has been non-traditional, and 25% of jobs in the US are at high risk of being automated in the near future.

  • bucolis

    Oh well – the New York Times is still read by sheltered souls who think they’re not being lied to on a daily basis

  • Brent Henrikson

    Yang convinced me that UBI is the future. Simple, efficient, fair, and doesn't disincentivize work like current programs. "not targeted enough" sounds to me like, " not extreme enough, so let's spend billions on complex, disincentivizing monitoring."

  • Aquatic Borealis

    Unions need to come back. They were cut back because lobbysists got control of congress. There's a simple reason for that, and a simple solution:
    https://youtu.be/1gEz__sMVaY

  • Kong

    Incentive to work?

    Elimination of income tax.

    We all know rich people pay little to no income tax. Repeal income tax is necessary. Tax property which rich disproportionately have alot of.

  • TheLAW

    Lol. Complains that UBI is too expensive, recommends ACA and universal childcare… clearly not the most bright economist.

  • peace leader

    Unite humanity disolve nations sovereignty and defence….make us live as a specie not nations..
    And have a total control with stability save money from nations defence spending…impliment UBI the only way to preserve capitalism economy model..into the future.

  • Oscar

    Paul Krugman doesn't seem to understand globalization took away the employees ability to bargain for higher salaries. The minimum wage already outsourced all the low value jobs and american wages are already higher than most other countries.

  • Acer rubrum

    Comparing universal basic income to Cuba and Castro and the idea of a static wage is a gross misrepresentation. This economist clearly doesn’t read anything on universal basic income or understand how it works; that or he is deliberately misleading the argument, meaning he is lying for his own personal gain.

  • Derek Van Gorder

    The best way to provide better-targeted welfare is to universalize it. It's perfectly analogous to healthcare– should we provide healthcare just to "some" people who "are in real need?" No, because it's difficult & wasteful for the government to accurately categorize who's in need and who's not, which is ultimately a subjective, qualitative measure. Better to universalize the service, to increase the net benefit to society on the whole, and boost economic productivity long-term. It's the moral thing to do, and the practical thing to do.

    We already have many systems of targeted welfare policy in the U.S.– they're inefficient, they serve a small percentage of those who actually need it, and their means-tested limits trap people in poverty instead of lifting them out of it. UBI solves all these problems instantly.

    And if you want to talk about "political feasibility"– American conservatives are warming up to UBI in droves, because it provides a model of the social safety net that's compatible with libertarian & free market values. Unlike current handouts, UBI dramatically increases economic freedom and encourages people to invest in themselves. Meanwhile they have perennially opposed all attempts at increasing targeted benefits like Krugman is asking for. So which is more feasible?

    Come on Krugman, you've got to provide a better argument than this if you want to justify opposition to UBI.

  • Antonia Smith

    um, malls are closing. amazon is taking over retail sales. this is a reality. automation is knocking out casshier jobs. go to your local supermarket and see what's happening. it is gonna get worse.

  • Kay Bass

    People ask me "How long is the Great tribulation?" It is a five- month cataclysm, as seen in Revelation 9: 5, 10 which corresponds to the 150 days in Genesis 7: 24; the Great flood of Noah. Matthew 24: 37. At this time, the wicked are destroyed, as seen in Psalms 92: 7 and Psalms 37: 8-10; and this brings the Great tribulation to an end. The survivors are found in God's Kingdom, at the appearance of Christ; at the beginning of the crisis, as seen in Matthew 25: 31, 34. That is why the faithful are protected; and will survive John 3: 16
    The EURO will collapse, leading to war between the EU and Russia
    Declare "Peace and security!" in Israel; apply maximum pressure to Iran, and watch the 'sudden destruction' Daniel 11: 44, 45 1Thessalonians 5: 2, 3. Jehovah's Day arrives 'like a thief in the night' 1Thessalonians 5: 2. Places in battle and distress at this time are: Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, and Ekron. Zephaniah 2: 1-11. Christ told us to 'get out of Judea' at this time. Mark 13: 16.
    The worldwide financial meltdown Psalms 46: 4-6 Revelation 18: 17 Ezekiel 7: 19 that comes with wars Jeremiah 25: 24-26 and worldwide wrath Revelation 11: 18 also means that the time of man's rule over man is OVER Romans 9: 28. Now, CHRIST RULES Matthew 24: 29, 30 and survivors are found in God's Kingdom, when He arrives. Matthew 25: 31, 34. "Come, you people! Buy wine and buy milk without money and without price!" Isaiah 55: 1. YES INDEED; they STUFF it, and YOU will SEE it happen.

  • Steve Grayson

    Smart productive people should only work 4 hours a day and the stupid/lazy folks need to be forced to work 8 hours a day (and maybe weekends too) THEN we will have equality in the labor force.

  • メイソンクレイグ

    He suggested that increasing the rewards to work is the solution to making America more equal but isn't the issue increasingly that jobs are disappearing due to technology progressing at a rate faster than newer roles are being generated? Moreover evidence suggests that retraining programs are highly ineffective, so it doesn't matter in such a case how much you incentivize somebody to work if the jobs aren't available or they don't posses the prerequisite skill set to acquire the jobs that are. It's hard to think that a single parent with a starving baby isn't seeking work due to a lack of incentive.

  • interloop

    Well Paul, if I relied on your predictions I would have invested and held blackberry, blockbuster and AOL stocks indefinitely.

  • RAMESH KAMATH

    People with more money than decided set amount should be forced to spend the extra money, if they don't spend then there would be 100% tax on the extra money,
    This taxed money could be spent by the government for projects or countries development like Medicare and free education.

    I believe this will make it so that demand is more, making more jobs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *