Re:Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from C...
by 11thEarlOfMar on Sunday November 22, 2015 @04:51PM
(#10611637)
Here's a theory for you...
1. Better income for adults means lower crime rates. A minimum wage job qt $7.25 plus $1,000/month grosses $27,080.
2. A Basic Income improves the outcome of children in poor families. Two minimum wage-earning parents plus $1,000/month per adult yields $54,160: Reduces divorce rate, reduces domestic violence, enables residence in a better neighborhood and attendance to better schools.
3. An improved outcome for children also means lower crime rates.
4. Lower crime rates improve real estate values. Anecdotally, from 1998 to 2006, East Palo Alto median home prices increased from $190,000 to $650,000 (342%). Over the same time period, the total crimes reported dropped from 550 to 350 (was over 900 in 1988) [0]. (note that the median home price has not further increased since 2006).
5. There are about 3,600 detached single housing units. [1]. With a little arithmetic, the total increase in the value of the real estate owned by those owners was $1,656,000,000.
6. A basic income of $1,000 per month for East Palo Alto over those 8 years would have cost $1,824,000,000.[1]
7. Property tax receipts increased somewhat. The county gets 1% annually, but due to prop 13, that will take a long while to fully materialize.
8. Sales tax receipts would likely increase as the population would have $228,000,000 more to spend each year.
So, if it is true that a basic income would reduce crime and lower crime rates improve real estate prices, then part of the economic analysis of a basic income needs to factor that in.
1. Better income for adults means lower crime rates. A minimum wage job qt $7.25 plus $1,000/month grosses $27,080.
2. A Basic Income improves the outcome of children in poor families. Two minimum wage-earning parents plus $1,000/month per adult yields $54,160: Reduces divorce rate, reduces domestic violence, enables residence in a better neighborhood and attendance to better schools.
3. An improved outcome for children also means lower crime rates.
4. Lower crime rates improve real estate values. Anecdotally, from 1998 to 2006, East Palo Alto median home prices increased from $190,000 to $650,000 (342%). Over the same time period, the total crimes reported dropped from 550 to 350 (was over 900 in 1988) [0]. (note that the median home price has not further increased since 2006).
5. There are about 3,600 detached single housing units. [1]. With a little arithmetic, the total increase in the value of the real estate owned by those owners was $1,656,000,000.
6. A basic income of $1,000 per month for East Palo Alto over those 8 years would have cost $1,824,000,000.[1]
7. Property tax receipts increased somewhat. The county gets 1% annually, but due to prop 13, that will take a long while to fully materialize.
8. Sales tax receipts would likely increase as the population would have $228,000,000 more to spend each year.
So, if it is true that a basic income would reduce crime and lower crime rates improve real estate prices, then part of the economic analysis of a basic income needs to factor that in.
[0] https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/EPA_Main_Report_Final.pdf
[1] http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/cities/EastPaloAlto.htm
Mods, please add 'anecdotally' to the spell check dictionary