Means testing is dumb. If you're taxing the top income brackets appropriately it doesn't matter if they're getting $500/ month if they happen to have a kid.
"The fact that it’s universal is particularly smart. Means-testing makes people feel good — it rids them of the terror of money going to the undeserving. Means-tested programs are very often more complicated and thus often actually more expensive than universal programs because they require so much more administrative work. Were this programs means-tested, you would need people to do the work of determining eligibility for the initial $1500 payout and then again every month for the whole first year of the child’s life. With 1200 new babies born in Flint every year and the vast majority of households making less than the local living wage for those with one child — and with almost 70 percent of kids in the city living in poverty — means-testing would make the program considerably more expensive and unwieldy."
Paragraphs like this are one of the reasons why I read (and sometimes donate to) WONKETTE. Thanks, Robyn Pennacchia!
There may be some times when means testing is worth doing, but somebody has to do the math first. I think when we try to use public money either to punish the poor or to reward the rich, we waste money either way. And it's morally backward: the poor don't need any more punishment, and the rich don't need any more reward.
I had not heard about this before now but this is great news. As people so often forget money given to middle and lower class people gets spent in the community helping everyone in the community to do better. It's money well spent.
Seems like all you need to qualify is live in Flint and have a baby. For those who've never been to Flint, 7500.00 is minor compensation for living in a city so long neglected that services we mostly consider minimal are hard (if not impossible) to access. I hope this is not the last investment the state makes in this city.
Another thing about means-tested as opposed to universal benefits is that for some people there is a sense of shame about applying for them, even if they are desperately in need of them.
More? More universal basic porridge, they want?! Are there no workhouses? (I think the right-wingers must be getting to me. Either that, or I need another cup of coffee.) But seriously, this is a fine idea.
Yay, nice times! I'm glad they are starting in Flint. After Republicans screwed the people of that city so hard, Flint deserves some TLC from the state government. MI doesn't need to track how the money is spent. We know that the majority will go to childcare, diapers and housing.
If Conservatives were really concerned about Replacement Theory and not having enough workers, you’d think they’d recognize that cost is a big factor in family planning. Then they’d bend over backwards to implement Universal Healthcare, Basic Income, Paid FML, PTO, Universal Childcare, etc.
I don't have children, have never wanted them, and at age 49 and minus a uterus, am *extremely unlikely* to ever have them. I wholeheartedly support this program, especially the fact that it isn't means-tested, because that's just a waste of money that makes the lizard brains of mean skinflints tingle.
Not a Michigan resident, enjoy visiting the place though. But I have to say Gretchen Whitmer is an elite tier governor. The whole Democratic delegation is kicking ass in that state.
What a nice piece of news, and excellent commentary. Much needed in the middle of all the primary BS.
UBI is the only good idea Andrew Yang ever had. I hope the program in Flint is a massive success.
Means testing is dumb. If you're taxing the top income brackets appropriately it doesn't matter if they're getting $500/ month if they happen to have a kid.
Funny looking kitty.
Great! As a retired career bureaucrat, I appreciate the point about the cost of universal vs. means-tested programs.
Nice times story! What does Nikki say about it?
"The fact that it’s universal is particularly smart. Means-testing makes people feel good — it rids them of the terror of money going to the undeserving. Means-tested programs are very often more complicated and thus often actually more expensive than universal programs because they require so much more administrative work. Were this programs means-tested, you would need people to do the work of determining eligibility for the initial $1500 payout and then again every month for the whole first year of the child’s life. With 1200 new babies born in Flint every year and the vast majority of households making less than the local living wage for those with one child — and with almost 70 percent of kids in the city living in poverty — means-testing would make the program considerably more expensive and unwieldy."
Paragraphs like this are one of the reasons why I read (and sometimes donate to) WONKETTE. Thanks, Robyn Pennacchia!
There may be some times when means testing is worth doing, but somebody has to do the math first. I think when we try to use public money either to punish the poor or to reward the rich, we waste money either way. And it's morally backward: the poor don't need any more punishment, and the rich don't need any more reward.
I had not heard about this before now but this is great news. As people so often forget money given to middle and lower class people gets spent in the community helping everyone in the community to do better. It's money well spent.
Seems like all you need to qualify is live in Flint and have a baby. For those who've never been to Flint, 7500.00 is minor compensation for living in a city so long neglected that services we mostly consider minimal are hard (if not impossible) to access. I hope this is not the last investment the state makes in this city.
Another thing about means-tested as opposed to universal benefits is that for some people there is a sense of shame about applying for them, even if they are desperately in need of them.
More? More universal basic porridge, they want?! Are there no workhouses? (I think the right-wingers must be getting to me. Either that, or I need another cup of coffee.) But seriously, this is a fine idea.
New York should want to be Michigan when we grow up...
Yay, nice times! I'm glad they are starting in Flint. After Republicans screwed the people of that city so hard, Flint deserves some TLC from the state government. MI doesn't need to track how the money is spent. We know that the majority will go to childcare, diapers and housing.
If Conservatives were really concerned about Replacement Theory and not having enough workers, you’d think they’d recognize that cost is a big factor in family planning. Then they’d bend over backwards to implement Universal Healthcare, Basic Income, Paid FML, PTO, Universal Childcare, etc.
I don't have children, have never wanted them, and at age 49 and minus a uterus, am *extremely unlikely* to ever have them. I wholeheartedly support this program, especially the fact that it isn't means-tested, because that's just a waste of money that makes the lizard brains of mean skinflints tingle.
Not a Michigan resident, enjoy visiting the place though. But I have to say Gretchen Whitmer is an elite tier governor. The whole Democratic delegation is kicking ass in that state.