Talk:Basic income guarantee

What's all the fuss?
I don't understand what is vague or controversial about the implementation of a Basic Income. If an income tax already exists, then it is simply a matter of making it a refundable tax credit. It is very similar to the Earned Income Tax credit (which exists in the USA), except that you don't need to work to get a Basic Income. -adam


 * I don't know about that, but can we please at least say what country this is referring to in the article? I assume it's the US, but really don't know. I'm thinking of the reference to the "Green Party", by the way - maybe the idea of a "Basic Income" as used in this sense in international (though I doubt that somehow). --Camembert


 * Green Parties exist in many nations. I heard that the Irish Green Party was making a good push for Basic Income a couple of years ago (I'm in the USA).  It has also been on the platform of Green parties in areas that I live.  Anyway, that might have been a unnecessary comment, and I wouldn't object to its removal.

The "high cost" argument is very much a matter of opinion. I could make the case that basic income is a subsidy to employers and thus reduces the costs of employing people, (in the same general way that income tax increases the costs of employing people). Looked at in this way, it becomes clear that basic income can be implemented at no cost to the economy as a whole, since the cost of paying employees is merely switched from a headcount-related charge on employers' payrolls to a profit-related charge on their tax bill. However by reducing the direct costs of employing people it should increase the number of people in employment, reducing welfare payments and therefore reducing the cost to the economy as a whole. -- Derek Ross

Theory on French page
I've moved this from the article:
 * There is a complete mathematical demonstration of Basic Income, as unique class of solution of symetrical Mutual Credit Money System in the "Dividende universel" french wikipedia page, which might be included here (but it needs someone able to copy / paste or translate the mathematical formulas included in).

This article is horrible because it confuses concepts
the USBIG (U.S. Basic Income Guarantee) definition

"The Basic Income Guarantee is an unconditional, government-insured guarantee that all citizens will have enough income to meet their basic needs.",

and their page in general talks about a mix of Basic Income (BI) and Guaranteed Income (GI). Although the article goes to great pains to explain the difference between BI and GI, and claim that BIG is BI and not GI. The above definition of BIG is in fact GI and not BI.

"unconditional" aspect of BI, doesn't mean there is no forms to fill out and no approval needed

"government-insured guarantee" is pure GI, because the implementation is to subsidize people up to an income level. A guaranteed income of $15000 means that if your income from other source is above $15000 you receive no benefit, if your income is $14000, you receive $1000, and if your income is 0, you receive $15000.

Basic income of $10000 means that you receive $10000 no matter what your other income is.

I can volunteer to make the radical changes to this page to make BIG mean BI, or I can alter the Basic Income page to no longer point to this page. I will do so in a few days, assuming no one wants to insist on reverting the changes.

Godspiral (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Agree with you. Please do it I will support the move :-) Stanjourdan (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I want to remove this redirect and replace with short article explain the difference between BIG and BI
I have tried to remove this redirect and replace it with short article explain the difference between BIG and BI, with links to the BI, NIT, and GMI pages, but it always disappears--apparently automatically. Can someone tell me how to make my removal of the redirect say removed? Thanks, --Widerquist (talk) 16:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Karl Widerquist--Widerquist (talk) 16:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)