[Josh Martin]
Konczal vehemently disagrees with Zwolinski’s post from Cato Unbound that made a pragmatic libertarian case for a basic income. In the original post, Zwolinski points out the number of different welfare programs and the size of its bureaucracy as a reason to switch to the simpler basic income, but Konczal counters this by showing that seven programs account for most of welfare and that the average administrative cost is around five percent for each program. Thus, Konczal claims that a push for a basic income needs to be built on a sturdier argument than the libertarian one.
Mike Konczal, “The Pragmatic Libertarian Case for a Basic Income Doesn’t Add Up”, Next New Deal, 8 August 2014.
Konczal discusses the size of the bureaucracy in welfare (Source: Next New Deal)
Nobody understands bureaucrats and bureaucrats don’t understand anything – too busy being counter-productive. All of the math would make sense from the perspective of someone who,was living on the streets (or pretty damn close) is endowed with a monthly stipend of say, $3000 USD, who can now afford to rent a pad in a decent part of town, put gas in the car (or ride a bike), by food, clothes, pay their tuition and have some left over for a little fun. You’ll see the math not only adds up, it makes sense. Elephants and donkeys park in rear.