Is there any hope that we will ever have a Guaranteed Minimum Income (GMI)?

[jxnmsdemguy65]

Does anyone think that we'll ever see a Guaranteed Minimum Income (GMI), as originally proposed by Nixon, enacted in this country?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income

I could sure use it....

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. It's pretty much already there by the definition you've cited at Wikipedia.

A system of guaranteed minimum income can consist of several elements, most notably:

* a minimum wage, either set by the government or resulting from negotiations of employers or their organizations with trade unions; already exists

* a calculation of the social minimum, usually below the minimum wage; we already have a federal definition of poverty

* a safety net, to help citizens or families without sufficient financial means survive at the social minimum. This may be a transfer or, in some cases, a loan, and is generally conditional to availability for work, performance of community services, some kind of social contract, or commitment to a reintegration trajectory; this is essentially Bill Clinton's welfare reform

* child support by the government; already exists to varying degrees via TANF, WIC, SCHIP, and other programs

* student grants and student loans; Pell Grants, Stafford Loans

* state pension for the elderly. Social Security

Now, you could most certainly argue that those items are currently insufficiently supported (and I would certianly agree), but the infrastructure is in place.

[zipplewrath]

2. Careful

We have a definition of poverty, but that doesn't mean we step in a raise people above that level. And it is ABOVE the minimum wage.

[NoNothing]

4. By definition

Doesn't the GMI have to be at or below poverty level?

Else why would people go to work?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. All I said, if you'll notice, is that the system is in place.

I also pretty clearly indicate that I think it's currently insufficient.

[zipplewrath]

10. No, I caught that

My real point was that the missing item is an ACTUAL minimum "Guaranteed" income. You've got a minimum wage, but the income part isn't established in any way other that to identify that you aren't receiving it (i.e. the poverty level).

[brewens]

3. How well can someone live on minimum wage now?

I'm talking a young single person working full time. In the early 80's you could get by. It was only about $2.25 an hour then. You could afford an apartment, payments on a used car, telephone and cable tv. I did anyway, and I still had a little left to party on. The cost of living was not high in the area where I was then either.

[proudohioan]

5. You probably wouldn't be able to now...

especially when you consider most minimum wage jobs consider 34 hours a week "full-time", and most of the time, those jobs don't even average THAT per month.

I hear that one of the large counties here in Ohio have recently started using a 32hr work week to impute a minimum wage child support order on cases, as opposed to using a 40hr work week, which was standard. Reason? Not enough folks getting a steady 40 hour week these days.....

$7.35 per hour x 32 hours per week = $1019 gross. I'd say a person in your scenario would not be doing too well.

[brewens]

13. That's what I was thinking. My old lifestyle would equate to

an apartment, cable tv, internet, cell phone and a reasonable car these days. I'd guess minimum wage would need to be higher to cover that with food and everything.
My girlfriends daughter is planning on moving out and going to school. She says she wants to get her own apartment but she has no clue what that really costs. Even with a roommate it would be tough. She can live at home and go to school and be way better off.

[proudohioan]

14. I agree with you..

about your girlfriends daughter living at home while going to school. Everything always costs so much more than what you figure, and something unexpected ALWAYS comes up! She will be much better off staying at home!

When my daughter first moved out, the only way she was able to make it was by having 3 other roommates. She made minimum wage, but at least got 40 hours per week; however, she worked in the Federal Center (cafeteria), which meant every single holiday, snow day and other building closures were on her, since they weren't considered "Federal Employees". Sick days and vacation time were also non-existent; so she rarely averaged a full 40hr week month.

I'm so glad that we don't have to worry about having those McJobs anymore :sarcasm: !!!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. I don't disagree.

I fairly clearly said I think it's insufficient. My only point is that we have all of those things in place.

[Dr Morbius]

9. The current definition of poverty is way above minimum wage.

Not below. The "usually" makes all the difference, there, I suppose. No one can feed and house a family on minimum wage in my part of the country. We have a "minimum wage" but it's been held in place without regard to inflation, and that minimum wage has to be enough to lift someone out of poverty. Today it holds them, traps them really, in a cycle of poverty.

So, yes, technically we have all those things. But the minimum wage we have as a nation is so low, and meanwhile social security is also so low, and meanwhile the state support for children is also so minimal that we don't have these things to any functional degree.

[ipaint]

8. Nope, the trend continues downward for increasing numbers of americans.

And nothing has been done in the last 2 decades to stop it. In fact clinton's welfare reform made it worse.


Our Dirty Little Secret: Who's Really Poor in America?

..."The overwhelming problem today for most workers isn't this recession, as horrible as it is -- it's the fact that for every earned income level except the top 10%, average household income hasn't changed a bit for 10 years, and that for the bottom 60% of wage earners it hasn't changed for more than 20 years. Through economic expansions and recessions -- and bull and bear markets -- alike, 90% of workers in America have been standing still earnings-wise.

* And 100 million people, fully one-third of the entire U.S. population, are at or below "200% of the federal poverty line of $21,834 for a family of four", which is a needs-measure made lame by the fact that no family of four can actually comfortably live on such a low annual income."

http://www.alternet.org/story/145950/our_dirty_little_secret:_who%27s_really_poor_in_america?page=entire

Exactly what happens to any country that allows the vast majority of the wealth to be hoarded at the top.

[SocialistLez]

11. If people are getting their panties in a wad over minimum wage raises

I'd hate to see how SOME people would act if we had a guaranteed minimum income.

The usual calls of socialism and communism would start flying.
Anti-business.

Blah blah blah

[jody]

12. Good idea if GMI recipients agree to have only one child. n/t