Name: 人にお金を与える」。アニー・ローリーはベーシックインカムを擁護する ('Give People Money': Annie Lowrey Defends Basic Income)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T07:56:26.000Z
Duration: 14 min 12 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

This is Tyler Prochazka with the UBI podcast i'm here with Annie Lowrey the

転換語

author of "Give People Money". I'm really excited to talk to Annie because

様態の副詞

actually we have two degrees of separation. Annie wrote in The New York

Times several years ago about Enno Schmidt and his campaign in Switzerland

and you know Enno is friend of ours at UBI Taiwan where I work so I want to

welcome Annie to to the show today thanks so much for having me great so I

want to get right into it I'm curious first how did you first get

into UBI and why did it click for you yeah so I started writing about it when

I was I was a reporter at The New York Times and I was also writing for the New

York Times Magazine so I think I had heard of it before just like you know

what comes up occasionally in policy discussions but I first wrote about it

when the Swiss run referendum happened um and then I'd been writing a lot about

effective altruism effective philanthropy and just efficacy and

policy programs and so then you know had multiple occasions to kind of come back

to either writing about ubi specifically or just writing about you know more

Universal cash programs or cash transfers and what was it that compelled

you to write this book specifically you know I kind of see ubi as you know a key

that unlocks a lot of doors right so it's a really simple idea but it lets

you talk about universality it lets you talk about feminism it lets you talk

about the problems with GDP about how we measure welfare about government

paternalism and so I think it's kind of unusual and

that people and you know the future of work robots people get really excited to

talk about it and it kind of lets you look at all of these other really

pressing issues that you know are kind of hard to to knit together and that's

one of the fun things about it is you know it's kind of an optimistic sort of

futuristic saying to talk about like heavily intellectual but

let's you pretty quickly descend sort of into the policy and historical weeds of

why we have what we have so that's what I liked about it is it's kind of like a

complicated multifaceted idea and you know one thing that I don't think that's

made it into the book but I almost I thought it was like a jungle gym right

it lets you like do all sorts of sort of crazy interesting things and go crazy

interesting places one of the criticisms that I was reading was that like a lot

of books on UBI there's not a lot of specifics on financing so how do you

address the financing issue and what are some of the Europe lanes getting around

the feasibility question yeah so I've kind of two thoughts about that so one

is that it feels like a pretty high barrier to clear at least in US policy

to argue from the very outset how to pay for kind of a full-fat thousand

dollar-a-month everybody gets at ubi nobody's really talking about that and

almost all of our big social programs have started small and gotten bigger so

Social Security for instance it starts off in 1935 is a fairly limited program

and then proceeds to expand or Medicaid and Medicare right they start off small

and then they slowly get bigger and bigger Earned Income Tax Credit right so

it just feels like you know the question is what are you actually proposing and

what's the bar that you need to clear to get it I think it's much more likely

that the US would do something like expand the Earned Income Tax Credit or

create a negative income tax or have a universal child grant all of those

things are a lot easier to quote unquote pay for I also just think that there's

this way in which we ask for social programs to be paid for whereas you know

things like military spending and tax cuts you know you don't even have to you

don't have to pay for a dime of it and that feels pretty unfair and I think

that that really skews our sense of what's possible so when it comes to the

politics then you mentioned a lot of alternatives I'm wondering what is your

universality of basic income in exchange for maybe more politically feasible

system like yeah absolutely um so I think that

universality is a beautiful and wonderful thing and there are really

compelling arguments for it but it seems to me that you don't want to let more

marginal and stop more marginal improvements from happening that are a

lot more politically feasible just because you believe it should be

universal right so like we have a really bad child poverty program like I think

almost that's like a problem excuse me that's almost like a like a thing that

we should be solving first and you can solve that without without necessarily

going to a ubi again I think that our history suggests

that if you want universality the way is to kind of start small and expand as

opposed to you know immediately radically implementing so take something

like Social Security again it starts small it gets bigger and bigger and

bigger and it's pretty you near Universal and I think that you could

nudge it to being actually universal because it's so close to it so that's

sort of how I think about it do you think that there's a risk that when you

have something like basic income it becomes you know we think that for

conservatives who might find random stories about somebody that's lazy or

something like that how do you avoid those types of scenarios or is it

inevitable yeah so you know we tend to get those kinds

of stories and arguments about social welfare programs but not social

insurance programs welfare programs that are identified heavily with poverty with

poor people programs that give cash or in-kind benefits as opposed to going

giving support through the tax code what that implies to me is that something

like a negative income tax or expanded EITC would come under a lot less

scrutiny than something like the cash welfare program and again if you make

something a middle-class entitlement then I think that people stop asking

those questions nobody really thinks about oh you know is that really a good

house to be buying with your you know home mortgage interest deduction money

so you know who's receiving and how the program is framed matters a lot for how

we judge the program participants and sort of decide whether it's it's our

right to say that the money is well-spent or poorly spent there's been

a lot of that seems lately about experiments for

basic income people from basic income supporters when I was at the BN

conference that was what a lot of people were saying was that experiments sort of

put the onus on for people to prove that they're responsible with money and so it

creates this strange expectation for policymakers that the poor have to prove

that they're intelligent enough to take care of their own of their own finances

so I'm wondering what is your view of experiments do you think that they're

helpful for the movement do they delay things what is the direction that we

should be taking with basic income experiments I think they're really

important I mean we do have a lot of experimental evidence and suggestive

evidence from other programs like the Syme time studies um but I think that

there's a really important demonstration effect I really do think it matters when

you can point and say you know here's this family and here's what they did

with their money and you know I think that that is helpful in useful I also

think that you could get a kind of laboratory of democracy type effect so

字幕リスト動画再生

人にお金を与える」。アニー・ローリーはベーシックインカムを擁護する ('Give People Money': Annie Lowrey Defends Basic Income)

ultimately

sort

guarantee

evidence