Scott Santens, “If we no longer force people to work to meet their basic needs, won’t they stop working?”

Santens writes extensively on the question of what motivates us to work and whether or not anybody today can work for reasons other than for survival. He outlines three choices: working for others, working for ourselves, or doing zero work.  Santens argues that under the current system only the first option is possible, but that with a basic income people could finally reach option two or three.

Scott Santens, “If we no longer force people to work to meet their basic needs, won’t they stop working?”, Scott Santens, 27 January 2015.

Scott Santens, “Will Replacing Current Benefits With Cash Tomorrow Leave Today’s Recipients Better or Worse Off?”

Santens analyzes the current US welfare system and discusses the benefits of switching to a basic income of $12,000 for adults and $4,000 for children.  Utilizing the case study of a single parent with two kids, Santens considers multiple cases of different income levels, and on each one the basic income will leave the household better off, even with a 40 percent flat tax, which Santens also recommends.  He settles on the $12k/4k plan partially due to the face that a single parent with two kids and no labor market income currently receives $20,000 from all of the cash replaceable benefits (not Medicaid, childcare, or CHIP benefits).

Scott Santens, “Will Replacing Current Benefits With Cash Tomorrow Leave Today’s Recipients Better or Worse Off?”, Scott Santens, 18 December 2014.

Scott Santens, ‘Fit for work and fit to die’

Means testing reflects the conditionality of many social security systems around the world. The article lists some cases of recipients who ended up dead in part due to benefit withdrawal, concluding that this social ail can only be resolved with an unconditional basic income, removing conditionality from the system.

Scott Santens, “Fit for work and fit to die“, Medium, December 11 2014