WEBVTT

1
00:00:08.189 --> 00:00:13.330
basic income rise. They giving everybody cash without questions

2
00:00:13.330 --> 00:00:16.280
asked. So everybody receives the same thing and there

3
00:00:16.280 --> 00:00:19.550
are no conditions to reasoning that catch now. This

4
00:00:19.550 --> 00:00:23.239
idea has actually historically been around for a really long

5
00:00:23.239 --> 00:00:26.829
time as far as at least Thomas Paine. But

6
00:00:26.839 --> 00:00:31.949
it has seen a resurgence in recent years. And

7
00:00:31.960 --> 00:00:33.710
, you know, I think we can track that

8
00:00:33.719 --> 00:00:37.719
back to party, a Swiss referendum and then eventually

9
00:00:37.719 --> 00:00:40.070
the most momentous event for the U. S.

10
00:00:40.070 --> 00:00:43.829
Was and the Andrew Yang campaign, where he defended

11
00:00:43.840 --> 00:00:49.359
a$1000 months benefit. Universal Basic Income, Freedom

12
00:00:49.509 --> 00:00:54.530
Benefit. And so I think he has successfully rebranded

13
00:00:54.850 --> 00:00:59.100
this universal basic income as an all American kind of

14
00:00:59.100 --> 00:01:03.929
proposal that has this freedom component to it. And

15
00:01:03.929 --> 00:01:06.579
I will say that as an economist that is very

16
00:01:06.579 --> 00:01:10.060
much conform to the way we're thinking about it.

17
00:01:10.069 --> 00:01:12.569
Because cash allows for the most freedom for people to

18
00:01:12.569 --> 00:01:15.120
spend it, however they see fit. And however

19
00:01:15.129 --> 00:01:19.769
they think they can benefit the most from that spending

20
00:01:19.810 --> 00:01:22.959
, In contrast with a type of benefit, let's

21
00:01:22.959 --> 00:01:26.409
say, like a public housing which, well,

22
00:01:26.420 --> 00:01:27.730
my definition, it's public housing. So if that's

23
00:01:27.730 --> 00:01:30.019
not your most pressing need. You know, you

24
00:01:30.019 --> 00:01:34.959
can't use public housing to buy something else. So

25
00:01:34.969 --> 00:01:37.519
So that's, you know, I think a very

26
00:01:37.519 --> 00:01:40.430
momentous event for the U. S. Is the

27
00:01:40.430 --> 00:01:42.390
Andrew Yang campaign that made a huge difference. And

28
00:01:42.390 --> 00:01:47.040
he has being so successful beyond expectation, you know

29
00:01:47.049 --> 00:01:52.590
, coming from a small, relatively unknown group of

30
00:01:52.590 --> 00:01:57.870
young tech inclined supporters and becoming really well known because

31
00:01:57.870 --> 00:02:00.120
it's been able to make it to the debate.

32
00:02:00.120 --> 00:02:04.239
And I think that we changed the national conversation around

33
00:02:04.239 --> 00:02:07.670
universal basic income. So I say, Step one

34
00:02:07.680 --> 00:02:09.500
. In the recent popularity of basic income, the

35
00:02:09.500 --> 00:02:14.289
most momentous while is the entry and campaign. But

36
00:02:14.289 --> 00:02:17.080
then stay two step to write and the popularity is

37
00:02:17.289 --> 00:02:23.520
the pandemic. What happened is, you know,

38
00:02:23.530 --> 00:02:28.729
it was so Sceviour so Southern, so many people

39
00:02:28.729 --> 00:02:30.879
were. All of us are put out of work

40
00:02:30.889 --> 00:02:34.780
by the closure of many businesses as well as consumers

41
00:02:34.780 --> 00:02:37.469
. And I wanted to wanting consumers didn't want to

42
00:02:37.469 --> 00:02:40.500
go out and consume and exposed themselves from a health

43
00:02:40.500 --> 00:02:44.509
perspective to this pandemic. So so many jobs have

44
00:02:44.520 --> 00:02:46.000
been cut. And so, as a result,

45
00:02:46.000 --> 00:02:50.099
the governments tried to act fast and they gave him

46
00:02:50.099 --> 00:02:53.159
a stimulus stimulus check is very much like a universal

47
00:02:53.169 --> 00:02:58.889
basic income. Everybody got the same amount and while

48
00:02:58.979 --> 00:03:02.080
the top 10% off highest income Americans were excluded,

49
00:03:02.180 --> 00:03:07.000
essentially 90% of the US population got it. So

50
00:03:07.000 --> 00:03:08.530
of course, this is temporary. But it gave

51
00:03:08.539 --> 00:03:13.860
people after Andrea talked about it. It gave people

52
00:03:13.860 --> 00:03:17.349
a concrete flavor of why would be to get it

53
00:03:17.360 --> 00:03:34.180
in their own pocket in their own household. I

54
00:03:34.180 --> 00:03:38.349
have been following the Harris ex polls since the 1st

55
00:03:38.349 --> 00:03:39.569
1 So you know, I was really excited to

56
00:03:39.569 --> 00:03:44.460
see the growth from 43 to 49 just like six

57
00:03:44.460 --> 00:03:49.729
months during Yang's campaign. And so I have actually

58
00:03:49.729 --> 00:03:53.389
been looking forward to seeing the next one comparing to

59
00:03:53.389 --> 00:03:55.330
those 1st 2 to see just what's going on during

60
00:03:55.330 --> 00:03:59.759
the pen dynamic. It's unfortunate that it's under these

61
00:03:59.759 --> 00:04:02.219
conditions that we're seeing this growth in U B I

62
00:04:02.520 --> 00:04:05.289
. I don't think that would have grown as fast

63
00:04:05.990 --> 00:04:10.250
outside of these conditions, but at the same time

64
00:04:10.419 --> 00:04:12.159
, I mean, it's so important that I feel

65
00:04:12.159 --> 00:04:14.900
that that support grows and so I'm happy to see

66
00:04:14.900 --> 00:04:19.339
that people are actually recognizing the need more for this

67
00:04:19.339 --> 00:04:23.370
idea during this time. Now, what I find

68
00:04:23.370 --> 00:04:27.670
really interesting in those pools is how the idea of

69
00:04:27.670 --> 00:04:30.519
a universal basic income has made inroads, promotion all

70
00:04:30.519 --> 00:04:34.009
demographics and party affiliation. So, for example,

71
00:04:34.009 --> 00:04:38.740
as faras demographics, we can see that some of

72
00:04:38.740 --> 00:04:43.180
the biggest gains are actually among the 35 to 49

73
00:04:43.180 --> 00:04:47.519
year olds who went from supporting at 53% in February

74
00:04:47.519 --> 00:04:53.699
2019 and now by August 2069%. So this is

75
00:04:53.699 --> 00:04:57.769
a more than 10% point increase in support now.

76
00:04:57.779 --> 00:05:00.319
Another fact thing that I found very interesting and surprising

77
00:05:00.319 --> 00:05:03.939
is the people over 65 who are least likely to

78
00:05:03.939 --> 00:05:08.709
support it on average. But the progress in support

79
00:05:08.720 --> 00:05:12.360
is pretty phenomenal. They went from supporting it only

80
00:05:12.370 --> 00:05:17.850
21% in February, 2019 to 34% so almost 1/3

81
00:05:18.360 --> 00:05:23.029
recently and against more than 10% point increase. Now

82
00:05:23.029 --> 00:05:25.540
, from a partisanship perspective, if you look at

83
00:05:25.540 --> 00:05:29.199
Democrats, they are more favorable to the idea.

84
00:05:29.209 --> 00:05:31.990
And you know that is to be expected because it's

85
00:05:32.009 --> 00:05:36.029
a new government benefit. Although off course there's actually

86
00:05:36.029 --> 00:05:41.129
libertarian supporters off something like a universal basic income because

87
00:05:41.129 --> 00:05:44.290
it's day their freedom. Nevertheless, it is a

88
00:05:44.290 --> 00:05:48.019
kind of idea that seems somewhat war Jermaine to Democrats

89
00:05:48.029 --> 00:05:55.360
. So I've seen some other previous state polling during

90
00:05:55.370 --> 00:05:57.750
the Corona virus, and it's out of Stanford.

91
00:05:58.310 --> 00:06:02.379
And it was really interesting how how they showed this

92
00:06:02.410 --> 00:06:04.949
big support to just over the course of a month

93
00:06:05.620 --> 00:06:11.529
and apparently theme. The source of this growth,

94
00:06:12.360 --> 00:06:16.920
they believe, is mainly along two different channels through

95
00:06:16.920 --> 00:06:20.610
two different groups. And it's that on the one

96
00:06:20.610 --> 00:06:27.370
hand, people are experiencing this loss of income and

97
00:06:27.370 --> 00:06:30.550
need for assistance for the first time really in their

98
00:06:30.550 --> 00:06:34.230
lives. And because of that, they're looking at

99
00:06:34.230 --> 00:06:38.000
this differently. Then they're also experiencing, like the

100
00:06:38.000 --> 00:06:41.160
safety net differently. So, you know, they

101
00:06:41.160 --> 00:06:43.930
actually for the first time had to apply for unemployment

102
00:06:44.230 --> 00:06:45.610
. And then, for the first time, they

103
00:06:45.620 --> 00:06:48.420
recognize that maybe you're having to call every day for

104
00:06:48.420 --> 00:06:50.250
like, a week in order to get in.

105
00:06:50.389 --> 00:06:54.920
Or maybe there's like giant lines. Or maybe you

106
00:06:55.250 --> 00:06:58.879
are actually able to fill out your stuff and then

107
00:06:58.879 --> 00:07:00.110
you never hear back from them. And so you

108
00:07:00.110 --> 00:07:02.160
know, there's people out there that have applied,

109
00:07:02.160 --> 00:07:05.509
and they have never gotten anything still, even though

110
00:07:05.509 --> 00:07:09.439
the boost is already over. So I think people

111
00:07:09.439 --> 00:07:12.779
are experiencing this, and that is making a big

112
00:07:12.779 --> 00:07:15.230
difference for them. And it's also not only the

113
00:07:15.240 --> 00:07:18.509
people who have they lost jobs but also had seen

114
00:07:18.509 --> 00:07:21.040
reduced income as well. So there's a lot of

115
00:07:21.040 --> 00:07:24.740
those people. The Stanford polling showed that about seven

116
00:07:24.740 --> 00:07:28.000
out of 10 people had either lost a job or

117
00:07:28.009 --> 00:07:30.750
seen reduced income. So those people a lot of

118
00:07:30.759 --> 00:07:33.189
people are experiencing, and the other part of it

119
00:07:33.199 --> 00:07:38.050
, too, is that so many people are worried

120
00:07:38.060 --> 00:07:41.160
about being in that group. And so even if

121
00:07:41.160 --> 00:07:44.139
you have your job and you haven't seen a drop

122
00:07:44.139 --> 00:07:46.660
in income, your like stress levels are up.

123
00:07:46.920 --> 00:07:49.569
You were living in insecure existence where you feel that

124
00:07:49.579 --> 00:07:53.379
any moment your job could be gone, and then

125
00:07:53.389 --> 00:07:55.790
you have to go through all this stuff and maybe

126
00:07:55.800 --> 00:07:58.579
you will fall right through this conditional safety. And

127
00:07:58.660 --> 00:08:01.560
maybe you won't. It's a gamble, and so

128
00:08:01.569 --> 00:08:03.250
now, looking at it, from these lines to

129
00:08:03.250 --> 00:08:05.759
your thinking, wait a second. Universal basic income

130
00:08:05.759 --> 00:08:09.339
makes a lot more sense because it's going to be

131
00:08:09.339 --> 00:08:13.319
there no matter what. And now that it's coming

132
00:08:13.329 --> 00:08:16.250
like me, and that's like a big deal.

133
00:08:16.899 --> 00:08:20.949
And some, like psychological impacts from this, too

134
00:08:20.459 --> 00:08:24.290
, are the people are kind of feeling that they're

135
00:08:24.290 --> 00:08:26.240
in the same boat in a way that they weren't

136
00:08:26.250 --> 00:08:31.660
before. So you're looking at other people and whereas

137
00:08:31.730 --> 00:08:33.929
prior to the pandemic, hitting, if you were

138
00:08:33.929 --> 00:08:37.549
asked the question, Do you think if someone gets

139
00:08:37.549 --> 00:08:39.789
a basic income that you will be better off and

140
00:08:39.789 --> 00:08:41.700
that person would have said I don't think so.

141
00:08:41.700 --> 00:08:43.110
It's gonna help them, but it's not gonna help

142
00:08:43.110 --> 00:08:48.149
me. And now they're flipping on that. They're

143
00:08:48.159 --> 00:08:50.190
thinking, Wait a second. I know that if

144
00:08:50.190 --> 00:08:52.970
someone else gets this than I am helped because,

145
00:08:54.210 --> 00:08:54.370
you know, we're all in the same boat,

146
00:08:54.370 --> 00:08:58.590
we're all connected their income as my income. There's

147
00:08:58.590 --> 00:09:03.860
just mawr kind of cohesion happening at the same time

148
00:09:03.870 --> 00:09:05.269
as also like we're seeing all this like, you

149
00:09:05.269 --> 00:09:07.799
know, social disarray. Possibly, you know,

150
00:09:07.799 --> 00:09:09.830
we're seeing like people in the streets and stuff,

151
00:09:11.120 --> 00:09:11.809
but at the same time, there is like this

152
00:09:11.809 --> 00:09:15.070
kind of a sense, too, that that we're

153
00:09:15.070 --> 00:09:16.990
in this together more than before. And so,

154
00:09:16.990 --> 00:09:20.230
yeah, hopefully we'll just keep bun seeing that steady

155
00:09:20.240 --> 00:09:24.750
growth with support in basic income. But it's a

156
00:09:24.879 --> 00:09:28.870
it's a big deal that it's finally majority support in

157
00:09:28.879 --> 00:09:31.620
the Harris expert. Excited. I am against the

158
00:09:31.620 --> 00:09:37.580
universal basic income because I don't think that people who

159
00:09:37.580 --> 00:09:41.720
are middle class or above should be getting free money

160
00:09:41.730 --> 00:09:43.860
that ultimately comes from all of us, including taxpayers

161
00:09:43.870 --> 00:09:46.809
who are poor, you know. So I I

162
00:09:46.809 --> 00:09:48.769
make a good income. I have made a good

163
00:09:48.769 --> 00:09:52.350
income. There is no reason why I should be

164
00:09:52.360 --> 00:09:54.529
getting, you know,$1000 in lot$1500 a

165
00:09:54.529 --> 00:09:58.960
month for$500 a month in free, unencumbered money

166
00:09:58.960 --> 00:10:01.139
from the government. I don't need it. Certainly

167
00:10:01.139 --> 00:10:03.750
people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet donated members of

168
00:10:03.759 --> 00:10:07.500
Congress don't need it. It is ridiculous to in

169
00:10:07.500 --> 00:10:11.240
a world where the federal government is something like$25

170
00:10:11.240 --> 00:10:15.820
trillion of debt that they've racked up over the history

171
00:10:15.820 --> 00:10:18.210
of the United States, just start saying that middle

172
00:10:18.210 --> 00:10:22.879
class, upper middle class wealthy plutocrats get free money

173
00:10:22.879 --> 00:10:24.899
. That's that's insane. So I think on a

174
00:10:24.909 --> 00:10:26.539
basic moral level, that's bad. I think there

175
00:10:26.539 --> 00:10:31.070
are a lot of kind of pragmatic and utilitarian concerns

176
00:10:31.070 --> 00:10:33.529
as well. Most of the research of universal basic

177
00:10:33.529 --> 00:10:37.580
income plans suggests that there is at some level in

178
00:10:37.580 --> 00:10:41.360
and in an important way there's a disincentive to work

179
00:10:41.649 --> 00:10:45.450
. If among a fair number of people, if

180
00:10:45.450 --> 00:10:48.370
you know you have$1000 coming in every month,

181
00:10:48.370 --> 00:10:50.139
regardless of whether you get out the door, not

182
00:10:50.149 --> 00:10:52.830
for some number of people that's gonna be there going

183
00:10:52.830 --> 00:10:54.379
to be like, OK, I'm bid with that

184
00:10:54.389 --> 00:10:56.320
and they're not gonna be productive. I think that's

185
00:10:56.320 --> 00:11:01.250
problematic on then. The other thing is that for

186
00:11:01.250 --> 00:11:05.399
universal basic income to really work without completely breaking the

187
00:11:05.409 --> 00:11:07.019
bank of the United States, it needs to be

188
00:11:07.029 --> 00:11:09.000
done in a way where we get rid of all

189
00:11:09.000 --> 00:11:13.230
transfer programs for social welfare spending and whether it's so

190
00:11:13.230 --> 00:11:16.899
security or Medicare, student loans, home mortgage interest

191
00:11:16.899 --> 00:11:20.019
deductions, farm subsidies, you name it. All

192
00:11:20.019 --> 00:11:22.620
of that kind of stuff should disappear, and then

193
00:11:22.620 --> 00:11:24.370
it should be replaced with a single payment a month

194
00:11:24.379 --> 00:11:28.960
. There is virtually nobody who seriously thinks that under

195
00:11:28.960 --> 00:11:33.220
any kind of universal basic income plane, we're actually

196
00:11:33.220 --> 00:11:35.399
going to do that. What is likely to happen

197
00:11:35.779 --> 00:11:39.690
is that we'll say here's an extra amount of money

198
00:11:39.690 --> 00:11:41.899
, free money and months to do whatever you want

199
00:11:41.899 --> 00:11:43.809
with. And we're going to continue housing vouchers.

200
00:11:43.820 --> 00:11:50.049
We're going to continue unemployment benefits or food stamps or

201
00:11:50.059 --> 00:11:52.309
, you know, Social Security disability, things like

202
00:11:52.320 --> 00:11:54.480
that. So I don't think from a political economic

203
00:11:54.480 --> 00:11:58.830
viewpoint from a few point of political economy, we

204
00:11:58.830 --> 00:12:01.029
can expect this program to stay pure in the way

205
00:12:01.029 --> 00:12:03.710
that I think it needs to in order to work

206
00:12:03.710 --> 00:12:07.470
most effective. So the future, maybe I is

207
00:12:07.470 --> 00:12:09.309
going to be very interesting. I think it very

208
00:12:09.309 --> 00:12:11.659
much depends during the U. S. On who

209
00:12:11.659 --> 00:12:16.600
wins the presidential election. But I think in general

210
00:12:16.690 --> 00:12:20.860
it's clear that the idea is becoming more appealing.

211
00:12:20.870 --> 00:12:22.149
And so I think that there will be, no

212
00:12:22.149 --> 00:12:26.830
matter what happens, further developments and blueprints off.

213
00:12:26.840 --> 00:12:30.750
You know how we might to be getting there.

214
 -->