보편적 기본 소득: 자동화 위기에 대한 논란의 여지가 있는 해결책

### 보편적 기본소득 논쟁: 역사, 실험, 시사점
* 💰 보편적 기본소득(UBI)은 **토마스 모어, 토마스 페인, 마틴 루터 킹 주니어**와 같은 역사적 인물들이 다양한 제안을 내놓으며 **500년 이상 논의**되어 온 개념입니다.
* 🌐 이 아이디어는 가까운 미래에 **일자리의 40~50%가 자동화될 것**으로 예상되는 자동화의 물결이 임박하면서 다시금 관심을 받고 있습니다.
* 💡 지지자들은 **UBI가 빈곤을 완화**하고, **경제 성장을 촉진**하며, **기술 실업에 대비한 안전망**을 제공할 수 있다고 주장합니다.
* 🏛 UBI의 잠재적 이점에도 불구하고, **연간 수조 달러가 소요될 것으로 추정**되는 등 자금 조달은 여전히 큰 과제로 남아 있습니다.
* 🌍 글로벌 UBI 실험에 따르면 일부 연구에서는 **웰빙과 경제적 안정성이 개선**된 것으로 나타난 반면, 다른 연구에서는 **업무 행동과 건강에 미치는 영향이 미미**한 것으로 나타나는 등 결과가 엇갈리고 있습니다.
* 🇺🇸 Open Research에서 실시한 최근 미국 연구에 따르면 **월 1,000달러의 UBI를 받는 사람들**은 근무 시간은 약간 줄었지만 식비와 임대료와 같은 필수 지출은 더 많이 하는 것으로 나타났습니다.
* 😕 비평가들은 UBI가 빈곤의 근본 원인을 해결하지 못할 수 있으며 **인플레이션이나 근로 의욕 저하**와 같은 의도하지 않은 결과를 초래할 수 있다고 주장합니다.
* 🔮 UBI의 효과, 실행, 사회에 대한 장기적인 영향에 대한 의문과 함께 **UBI를 둘러싼 논쟁**는 계속되고 있습니다.

보편적 기본소득은 모든 시민에게 기본 소득을 제공하는 것을 목표로 하는 미래 일자리 자동화에 대한 해결책으로 제안되었습니다.

all right so open research just published the results to one of the most important monetary experiments in human history. Free money from the government. Because what happens to society when our jobs are taken over by AI and robots. What would we do for work? How would we make money? And I know this sounds like science fiction but research shows we're just a couple years away from that reality because 40 to 50% of all jobs will soon be automated. This wave of automation is coming and it hasn't crashed over society yet but it's going to and that's bad unless of course you're the one building all the robots. But one of the solutions Economist have come up with is what if we gave everyone free money from the government boom every single year it's yours no questions asked. It's a concept called Universal basic income the idea that the government pays everyone a base income that is above the poverty line. Right now the poverty line as defined by the Census Bureau is almost at $5,000 a year or a little over $1,200 a month. Now this

is an extremely controversial idea, and everyone has an opinion about it because we've been arguing about this for 500 years now, literally since the year 1516. That's when Sir Thomas More introduced the idea in his book called Utopia. That's where he imagined a society that provided a basic income to all its citizens as long as they showed a willingness to work. And as we go forward through history, you're going to see variants of this idea over and over again. In 1797, for example, there was Thomas Paine, one of the founding fathers of the United States, and he came up with an idea for basic income in a pamphlet he called Agrarian Justice. He wanted to pay every citizen some amount of money to compensate for what's called the loss of their natural inheritance. And the natural inheritance is an idea that every person born on Earth should be entitled to some part of its natural resources because think about it, people born way into the future will have less stuff to pick from as more and more of Earth's resources are

used up and privatized so to compensate Thomas Payne wanted to pay them some amount of money, and in the 20th century, there was another variation proposed by Economist Milton Friedman in the form of a negative income tax. Friedman's idea was to provide cash payments to anyone whose income fell below a certain level. Milton Friedman, by the way, was an OG loved by everyone. He was a Nobel Prize-winning Economist that, fun fact, predicted Bitcoin's existence way before it happened in 1999. Look it up, but not before you watch this video, please. Now, in 1967, in a book called Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community, Martin Luther King Jr. had his own idea when he said the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure, the guaranteed income. And one of the more recent examples is a political candidate, Andrew Yang, with his Freedom Dividend when he proposed giving anyone over the age of 18 $1,000 a month.

My flagship proposal is a freedom dividend of $11,000 a month for every American adult starting at age 18. Most recently, you probably had a taste of UBI when the government started to give everyone a stimulus check of $1,200. All of these are variations of the universal basic income idea, and it's only going to get more important to figure out as society evolves thanks to technology. But here's where it gets super interesting. We've been running this money experiment all around the world in different countries, and just a couple weeks ago we got the results to the United States. What's considered to be the most comprehensive randomized study of UBI ever conducted. And in today's video, I want to show you the history of UBI, the arguments for it, some of the arguments that are against it, and what the test results showed. I think this is going to be a huge part of our conversation really soon, and I want you to know about it. So let's get into it. Hi, my name is h

j hope you're doing well. Come for the finance and stay for Universal Basic Income. One of my favorite videos on YouTube was a video by Casey Neistat where he talked about money and how it solves all the problems. Money won't solve your problems - what a crock of sh**. And I think I do have like a unique perspective on this because, you know, I spent a good part of my life being very, very poor. I qualify very poor as like zero in my bank account, zero savings, zero safety net, nowhere I could turn to for money. And you know, there was definitely a time in my life when my son was very small where if I didn't get free diapers and milk and money from the government, I'm not sure I could have made ends meet as a parent or as an individual. Fast forward a bit though, and Casey goes on to have one of the most successful careers on social media. He makes millions of dollars, goes on to become famous, and then he says, Money will solve your problems. This idea

that money won't solve problems. It's when I was dirt poor, money would have solved every one of my problems. So if money does solve all the problems, then why doesn't the government just pay everyone some amount of basic income? What if the government was able to solve the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, physiology? The idea that everyone could be able to afford the basics like food, shelter, and clothing. Would the world become a better place if people had more time to do what they love and become creative, or with the absence of a financial struggle make everybody lazy? Artificial intelligence and automation is getting us there faster every single day, and I think we could be on the edge of this future really soon. And if robots will soon be able to do our jobs faster and better than we can. Will jobs still be a core part of our identity, or will we have to find new purpose in life? In his video, Casey says that after a certain point, money doesn't really solve the problems that all of us will face throughout our

lives. So all of these questions are very philosophical, and we're finally starting to get some of the answers. And the more I looked into them, the more I regretted picking this video because it's extremely complicated. So here's what I learned. So here are the arguments in support of UBI. Economists say that some kind of a basic income can help us solve one of the hardest challenges that humanity is facing: poverty. Right now, there's over 38 million Americans alone that are living in poverty. They make less than $12,000 a year, and that leaves them very little for anything beyond the basics. And a study by the Roosevelt Institute found that a UBI of just $1,000 a month could help a lot of those people out of poverty by allowing them to focus on their skills and their career rather than just worrying about how they're going to eat. And according to the World Bank, over 700 million people live in extreme poverty worldwide. So this is a huge problem on a global

scale, but in theory, UBI could act like an economic stimulus to boost consumer spending because when people have more money, they tend to spend it on things like food and rent, which helps with economic growth. But I also learned that some of the most successful and richest people in the world, who are working to solve poverty, say that UBI could be one of the better ways to fix it. What to do about mass unemployment? Every single field is going to be touched by autom. This is going to be a massive social challenge, and I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. And UBI to me represented a floor, a floor that people who could stand on. So it means that unemployed people will be paid across the globe, yeah, and really have the knowledge and peace of mind ultimately that they could survive and eat and feed their children while they are learning how to transition into this new world. I don't think we're going to have a choice. So the main benefit of UBI is to fight against poverty

automation, which is going to become very real this decade. But the downside is, who's going to pay for it, because it's extremely expensive. If we were to give every just $11,000 a month, it would cost the US economy about $4 trillion a year. Now, for context, in 2024, the entire United States federal budget was $6.5 trillion, and that includes spending on Social Security, the entire military, Medicare, Medicaid, and other essential services. So, Ubbi at just $1,000 a month costs more than half of what the country spends in a single year, which means funding it would be really, really hard. But let's assume we cut out a bunch of bloated government programs, we got rid of tax loopholes, we tax the rich even more, and we found a way to make this work. The next question is, does it actually work? And it turns out we've been running these tests all over the world to see how people would react when they're given money for free. And here's what we

found in the 1970s. For example, Canada was running the mincome test where they gave the whole town of Dolphin, Manitoba, a basic income. What they found was an improvement to health care and higher graduation rates. Unfortunately, the program was cancelled after 4 years because of politics. But in 2017, Ontario tried again with another program to help 4,000 low-income residents. But again, the experiment was ended early because of a new government, so the results were inconclusive. But Brazil has been running an experiment of their own for decades called the Bolsa Familia or PBF, which helped around 20 million people out of poverty from 2002 to 2012. The percentage of Brazilians living on very little money dropped from 8.8 to 3.6%, and income inequality was lowered as well. In 2017, Finland, which is considered to be one of the most advanced welfare states in the world, tried their own experiment for a whole 2 years. They gave 2,000 unemployed

citizens a monthly income. What Finland discovered was that their program didn't really have much of an effect on people's desire to work less or work more, but it did increase their happiness and it lowered their stress levels. Now Germany also tried their own experiment in 2014 where they gave people $1,100 a month for one whole year, and the result was 80% of recipients said the income made them less anxious. More than half said it allowed them to continue their education, and 35% said they now felt more motivated at work. In 2017, Spain also tried this for Barcelona's poorest households, and they gave people almost $2,000 a month. The results again showed not much of an effect on people's willingness to work, but people did report feeling an improvement to their mental health. Now in Japan, there was a billionaire who ran his own private experiment. He gave out $9 million spread out amongst a thousand people. The results: a decrease in divorce rates and more than 70% of recipients

saying they experienced a significant increase in happiness. Now as I looked across the world at more and more countries running their own experiments, I found that their results were more or less the same. So the last place that I looked at was the United States because just a couple weeks ago we got the results to one of the bigger tests called the unconditional income study run by Sam Altman and open research. And here's what happened: The study ran from November 2020 to October 2023 and it split people into two different groups. The first group was given $1,000 every single month, and the other group, known as the control group, was given $50 a month. Now the average household income of people that got any money was about $30,000 a year, and after 3 years of running this experiment, the results are in. And here's what people did with their money: On average, people spent $310 more per month, mostly on food, rent, and car expenses. But surprisingly, the average income went down by $125 a month. The average work week also

went down by 1.3 hours, which adds up to about 8 days per year. So yes, studies showed that anyone who received an income on average did decide to work a little less, but it wasn't to the point where they all got lazy and they all became aspiring Yu-Gi-Oh players or worse, bad magicians. And the effects of free money on people's health was also not that noticeable. After doing blood tests, the study concluded that we find essentially no evidence of improvements in physical health, any benefits in nutrition, and blood samples that they measured were so small that they had to rule them out because they were also temporary. For example, stress went away in the first year of receiving money, but in the second year, it came back. The only real measurable health benefit that the paper reported was that recipients went to hospitals, doctors, and dentists more often, and they spent about $20 more a month on medical care. At the end, the study concluded saying that the biggest benefit of a basic income is that it

allowed people to prioritize how they spent their money, instead of always having to prioritize something like food. Now, right now, we are still running these free money experiments in over 24 States and dozens of cities. But as of now, we don't have a national UBI program. But at one point in history, we got really close to it. In 1969, that's when President Nixon was on the edge of accepting a basic income bill that would have given a family of four about $1,200 a month in today's money. It got so close to becoming law that it was passed by the Senate, but it was then rejected by the house. Now, throughout the video, I've given you a lot of data and a lot to think about. But if you made it this far, here's my personal opinion. Have you ever found the answer to something that you were really disappointed in? If I showed you one of my magic tricks on how it was done, you'd probably be pretty upset by the time you see how it actually works. Like if I took this two of clubs.

and I magically changed it into another card. Looks cool until I showed you how it was done. Well, that's not magic, is it? And that's how I feel about Ubi. I was rooting for it to work. I wanted to make this video and tell you that the studies show that if you pay these people this amount of money, it solves everything. And on paper, it really does. It's amazing. But the only measurable benefit where we see real good things happening is for those at the very bottom. Anything above that line of poverty becomes a temporary benefit. And there are theories that predicted this exactly like the Easterlin Paradox, which showed that worldwide among all people of all countries, happiness does go up with money, but it only goes up to a certain point. And subsequent studies show that the bigger indicator of happiness is not absolute income, it's relative income and income growth. I have this weird crazy theory that happiness can be found between reality and expectation. We can find happiness on the journey between two spaces of where we are today and

where we want to be. So if you gave someone $112,000 who wasn't making anything, you would make their life. If you gave that same $12,000 to someone making 50k a year, you'd make them happier as well, but not as happy as the person who wasn't making anything. And if you gave that same $12,000 to a person making a million a year, you'd have no effect on their happiness at all. And that's because as we make more money, our reality improves, and that closes the gap between itself and expectation. That's why I think a lot of rich, successful people can be so miserable. It's because their lives are so far ahead and so utopian that there's no reasonable reachable expectation that can be achievable. Because if your life is already perfect, where can you go from there? That gap is closed. And so what you're left with is just comparison to others, feeling like you're behind, or setting unattainable, unreachable goals. I was watching this guy who was on a yacht.

he rented the yacht, but he was worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and he was complaining that he couldn't afford the yacht yet, and I thought, how are you not happy with where you are? You're worth hundreds of millions of dollars. You think that yacht's going to do it for you? Find something else, else to close the gap with. Don't make it money, and if it's money, make it something attainable, or make it something else. Happiness is that journey between where we are and where we want to be. That's why it's not absolute income that measures happiness, it's the growth of income that's longer lasting and actually measurable. But I'm not giving up on the idea just yet because maybe the experiment itself was wrong. Maybe instead of giving 12,000 a year to people that are making 30,000 wasn't the right answer. Maybe it was supposed to go to the people that weren't making any income or people that are homeless. Or maybe it wasn't supposed to come in the form of money at all. Maybe it should

have been basic needs like affordable housing, shelter, health care, food, and education, a circumstance, a reality that set people up on a good path to chase that gap between their reality and their future expectation and their goals. Whatever the answer is, I hope you didn't think you going to find it on a YouTube video, so I don't know why you're still watching, but I'm just glad that there's welfare programs that exist that gave people like Casey Neistat the security to pursue their dreams and make the videos that I've enjoyed. That's why I'm not giving up on the idea yet, but I'd love to hear your thoughts. Do you support Universal Basic Income, and if you do, how do you think we should go about it and how should we fund it? I think it's a really interesting conversation that we're about to have a lot more of in the future, but in the meantime, I hope you have a wonderful rest of your day. Smash the like button, subscribe if you haven't already, don't forget to grab your free stocks. Links

are down below. Go track them automatically with the spreadsheet linked down below in my patreon. Thank you so much for watching this video. I'd love to see you back here next week. I'll see you soon. Bye-bye.

What Would Happen If Everyone Got $1,000 a Month? (UBI Theory Explained)

I will NEVER contact you for business or promotions (even if it comes from my legit email). I will not use IG, Telegram, or whatsapp to reach out - please ignore and report those accounts. 

I'm like Harry Potter - if he was a financial minimalist, did card tricks and worried about money. Biz inquiries: andrei@majikh.com


Andrei Jikh

보편적 기본소득(UBI)의 역사와 영향력

UBI는 모든 시민에게 빈곤선 이상의 기본 소득을 제공하자는 개념으로, 1516년으로 거슬러 올라가는 역사가 있습니다.

토마스 모어, 토마스 페인, 밀턴 프리드먼, 마틴 루터 킹 주니어, 앤드류 양 등 다양한 인물들이 이 아이디어의 다양한 버전을 제안했습니다.

이 개념은 자동화가 일자리에 미칠 수 있는 잠재적 영향으로 인해 현대에 들어 더욱 중요해졌으며, 최근 미국에서 UBI의 효과에 대한 종합적인 연구가 진행되면서 공론화의 중심에 서게 되었습니다.

돈의 변혁적 힘과 UBI의 잠재적 혜택에 대한 케이시 니스탯의 동영상입니다.

그는 돈이 특히 빈곤층에게 많은 문제를 해결할 수 있으며, UBI는 사람들이 자신의 직업과 기술에 집중할 수 있도록 도울 수 있다고 주장합니다.

경제학자들과 세계은행은 UBI가 기본적인 생필품을 구입할 수 있는 수단을 제공함으로써 수백만 명의 삶을 개선할 수 있는 잠재력을 가지고 있으며, 전 세계 빈곤이라는 중대한 문제에 대한 해결책으로 UBI를 지지합니다.

UBI는 경기 부양책으로 작용하여 소비자 지출을 늘리고 빈곤과 자동화의 영향을 완화하는 데 도움이 될 수 있습니다.

그러나 UBI의 높은 비용으로 인해 자금 조달과 실용성에 대한 의문이 제기되고 있습니다.

과거 실험에서 결정적인 결과를 얻지는 못했지만 캐나다, 브라질, 핀란드와 같은 국가에서는 UBI 실험을 통해 의료 서비스, 졸업률, 빈곤 감소에 긍정적인 효과를 보았습니다.

전 세계 보편적 기본소득(UBI) 실험의 영향

핀란드, 독일, 스페인, 일본에서는 모두 UBI 실험을 실시하여 사람들의 행복감을 높이고 스트레스를 줄였으며, 경우에 따라서는 수혜자가 교육이나 일을 계속하도록 동기를 부여하는 것으로 나타났습니다.

수혜자에게 월 1,000달러를 지급한 미국의 UBI 연구에서는 평균 소득이 약간 감소하고 주당 평균 근무 시간이 줄어들었으며 생필품에 대한 월별 지출이 증가한 것으로 나타났습니다.

또한 이 연구에서는 의료 서비스 이용률 증가를 제외하고는 수혜자의 신체 건강이 장기적으로 크게 개선되지 않은 것으로 나타났습니다.

실패한 국가 보편적 기본소득(UBI) 프로그램 시도

닉슨 대통령은 1969년 4인 가족에게 월 1,200달러를 지급하는 UBI 법안 제정에 근접했지만, 결국 하원에서 부결되었습니다.

현재 24개 이상의 주와 여러 도시에서 UBI 실험이 진행 중이며, 그 결과 주로 빈곤층에 영향을 미치는 반면 그 외의 사람들에게 미치는 영향은 제한적인 것으로 나타났습니다.

연사는 또한 UBI의 효과는 현실과 기대 사이의 격차에 기반하며, 저소득층의 행복에 큰 영향을 미칠 가능성이 있다는 개인적인 이론을 공유합니다.

행복과 보편적 기본소득에 대해 다시 생각하기

임대 요트에 대한 한 백만장자의 불만은 부를 통한 행복 추구에 대한 의문을 제기합니다.

화자는 보편적 기본소득이 소득이 없거나 노숙을 경험하는 사람들을 대상으로 하면 더 효과적일 수 있다고 제안합니다.

영상은 보편적 기본소득의 지원과 재원 마련에 대한 논의로 마무리됩니다.