Interesting. Survival for all is assured so long as enough people tend to the machines. And since you can earn up to 12 times as much as your lowliest employee, there is still something to strive for materialistically, if that's your thing.
Now the real question would be if this is put into implementation (unlikely that it will pass the vote BTW) then would we be unlocking a creative society where people are free to pursue science/art/etc. endeavors without concern for basic income - which would enable society to leap to a new level of advancement. Or would it create a society where 90% of the people sit around and do nothing while 10% of the frustrated population work to pay taxes to support the lazy 90%. Unfortunately I am betting on scenario 2 because the bottom line is that most people tend to be lazy and greedy. This "lazy and greedy" is also why communism fails in practice but sounds pausible in theory.
Look no further than Obama's supporters for the answer. It will be an epic failure, much like the entitlement society the democrats have fostered in our bankrupt country.
Or you know, Republicans. Three Kentucky counties â Owsley, McCreary and Wolfe â are the only places that rely on government programs such as Social Security, food stamps and Medicaid for more than half of income. The results of the 2012 presidential elections by county, per AP: Owsley: Mitt Romney 83%; Barack Obama 17.9% McCreary: Mitt Romney 80.0%; Barack Obama 18.7% Wolfe: Mitt Romney 60.3%; Barack Obama 38.1% http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/12/three-counties-in-kentucky-151076.html
The NYT provides an interactive map of the U.S. that shows the geography of government benefits. "The share of Americansâ income that comes from government benefit programs, like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, more than doubled over the last four decades, rising from 8 percent in 1969 to 18 percent in 2009." http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/12/us/entitlement-map.html?_r=1&
If you are a true keynesian you have to admit that giving 2800 to each citizen would have been far more stimulative, and had a far bigger multiplier than pissing away all the money in government where red tape and beurecracy hinders the ability of the money to cycle efficiently.
Hope they pass it. Maybe then all the tit-sucking parasites in the US will flock to Switzerland. (Any chance the Swiss are stupid enough to let them all in?)
A lot is highly dependent on culture. Ultimately, economics is all about incentives. If you incentivize people not to work, they won't. Now if you have a culture that values discipline and have a strong sense of civic responsibility, then giving people freebies will not disincentivize them too much. For example, if you did the same thing in Japan, I bet that the Japanese will still wake up and go to work every single day. Is there the same kind of culture in America? We all know the answer. Doing this will probably lead to an explosion in the illicit drug trade in the ghettoes.
You spend too much time with your mind in the ghetto. The majority of Americans would want something worth doing to fill their time, which is a big problem of the Swiss idea imo.