Recently, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, which held that abortion should be legal. Justice Samuel Alito, speaking for the 6-3 majority, wrote that since the right to abortion was not a right recognized by most states in 1868, when the 14th Amendment was ratified, it could not be used to justify the right to choose. He wrote that it could not be applied to other precedents, since Roe involved the termination of pregnancy and that life begins at conception.
Since, according to Justice Alito, life begins at conception, it is only fair that we ensure that every child is a wanted child. I propose that we pay everyone over 18 a universal basic income of $1,000 a month, $2,000 a month in the event of a pandemic, depression (such as the Great Recession), or nuclear attack. In addition, I propose that we resurrect the Child Tax Credit, which paid eligible households up to $3,600 a year for each child under 6 and up to $3,000 for each one between 6 and 17. In addition, I propose that we resurrect the child tax credit to pay eligible families 50% of their spending on childcare up to $8,000 for one child and up to $16,000 for two or more children.
First of all, it upholds the life and dignity of the human person. It’s not enough to postulate that life begins at conception and then leave everyone to sink or swim once they are born. A $1,000 a month UBI would allow a homeless person to buy three square meals a day and have some left over and possibly find a place to live.
It strengthens families and frees people up to participate in their churches and communities. One of the most common reasons for marital strife, in our personal observation, is finances. And we know of people who would spend all their time dedicated to their favorite civic groups and local governments if they had the money to do so.
This is not a substitute for work. People would still need to find jobs; even around here, with a low cost of living, $1,000 can barely make ends meet. But it can provide a floor and make work more meaningful. It would be leverage for workers; if an employer mistreated their workers, a basic income could tide them over until they found better work. It would help people escape domestic violence situations, since they would still have an income to help them until they could get back on their feet.
Any sound moral system has to put the poor first. On December 24th, 2021, Forbes reported that women who seek abortions are more than three times as likely to be poor; 49% of women who have abortions are poor, while the national poverty rate is 12%. 59% of women who are seeking abortions are mothers facing high poverty risk. If we don’t want people to get abortions, we need to get rid of the need by tackling poverty. The less poverty we have in this country, the less likely people are to get abortions.
Both parties in the recent case that led to the overthrow of Roe wanted the Supreme Court to decide one way or another; hence, Chief Justice Roberts’ search for middle ground by upholding Mississippi’s 15 week ban without entirely overturning Roe went unheeded.
No laws against abortion will stop people from getting them as long as there is rampant poverty in this country. People will either go to another state where it is legal, or they will get it illegally, or they will get it via abortion pills. If people have better ideas to tackle poverty, we’re willing to listen to better ideas. The idea now is to be peacemakers and find solutions.
Yes, a basic income would cost money. If we were to give everyone over 18 $1,000 a month, it would cost $3.1 trillion. The most obvious question is inflation. But we could minimize it if we found ways of paying for it.
First of all, we could cut our defense spending by two thirds and save $471 billion and still have the strongest military in the world. US Senate candidate Lewis Rolen, speaking at the Gentry County Democratic rally, said something that was very true. We are protected by the Atlantic and the Pacific and Mexico and Canada are not likely to invade us. I maintain we should protect NATO from Russia, Japan, the Philippines, Australia, and New Zealand from China, and South Korea from North Korea. But we have hundreds of military bases abroad that serve no useful purpose and weapons systems that we never use and never plan to use.
Secondly of all, basic income means we don’t have to jump through the hoops in order to get immediate help. We spend over $1.6 trillion on welfare costs. While we should not abolish welfare programs that we know work, there would be much less of a need for them, and much less paperwork for people. We could save as much as $1.2 trillion just in administrative costs.
Third, we could raise the individual income tax of people making $87,917 or more by 5%. That would raise around $410 billion. Most of us here don’t make that kind of money, and the wealthy can afford to pay a little more in order that we can tackle the problem of poverty.
Fourth, we have tried an experiment since 1981 called supply side economics, where we lower taxes on the rich in order for them to put more money in the economy. But it turns out that many turn around and offshore it so that they can avoid taxes. On April 13th, 2021, current IRS commissioner Charles Rettig estimated that the US is losing $1 trillion in unpaid taxes every year. If we improve oversight of high income tax returns of people making over $1 million a year, we could recover that and give it back to the people.
In 2017, the Roosevelt Institute reported that if we gave each adult $12,000 a year and paid for it, we would grow the economy by $515 billion and expand the labor force by 1.1 million people. This would create a tax base that would further pay for a basic income.
The total cost of a child tax credit and the childcare credit would be around $495 billion. If we means tested it, by limiting it to families making $75,000 or less, we could reduce it to $329 billion. In March 2022, a study by researchers at Barnard College, Columbia University, and the Open Sky Policy Institute found that the return on investment for such a policy would be 10 to 1. This includes improved health and longevity for kids, which means savings for public healthcare and insurance premiums. Crime would fall. Kids whose families got such checks would see future earnings go up $270 billion in their lifetime – meaning a bigger tax base.
There are a few arguments against it. The first is that it would positively reinforce the cycle of consumption that is driving us into debt. But that is an argument for more financial literacy, which we all support. There are plenty of places like Dave Ramsey, Mr. Money Mustache, the Minimalists, and the Tiny House Movement which help people live within their means and declutter. We’re open to other voices as well.
Pushing for public policy steps to reduce poverty and abortions and encouraging people to live within their means are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they compliment each other. The more people save from not overconsuming, the more they spend on things or people that truly matter, like their children.
The second is that it would discourage people from going to work. We all know the type of person who feels that they should not have to work. But we can’t allow the actions of a few to override the fact that we have a poverty problem that is leading to the erosion of our childrens’ futures. Besides, there are many reasons why people don’t work. Some take care of a child or an elderly loved one. COVID is not gone, but is lingering around. Some have disabilities that we are not aware of; people are under no obligation to explain their situations if they don’t want to.
God had the foreknowledge to know that some of us would choose to go astray. He had the foreknowledge to know that Lucifer would revolt against him. That did not stop him from creating us in his image. By the same token, the fact that certain people will choose to misuse their time and talents should not stop us from doing all we can to lift people out of poverty and making every child a wanted child.
No comments:
Post a Comment