Minimum Income for Unemployed in NAIRU Equillibrium?

Beyond Samuelson text-bookonomics, beyond monetarism and Keynsianism, the supply side of Lafferian market march madness with no borders has transcended and largely negated the concept of government collective macro-economic interventions. The Democratic Party has accepted the concept of NAIRU-the natural anti-inflation rate of unemployment and pure market individualism with deemphasis of the nation’s poor. It should be possible to compensate for the natural rate of structural unemployment by providing a minimum income for the unemployed who will not find work because economic theory does not permit a certain percentage of a population to be employed.

Designing programs to provide medical service or the poor for free would best lower the cost of medicine in the United States. The poor cannot afford insurance or health services when they need them, so providing free clinics for the poor would not take money away from medical providers. As it is the public must absorb the cost of emergency room treatments the poor are forced to seek, and the cost is passed on to those that can afford medical services.

With a minimum national income a standardization of subsistence policy for the unemployed, undesirable and hopeless would be created that would enable a functional level of social fluidity and opportunity to make ends meet in ad hoc reinforcement for training opportunities. Minimum free enterprise might also be supported by the innovative with a minimum income.

Some might argue that if the natural unemployment rate is 5%, those five per cent should suffer until they find work and a rotating door of sharing the pain of destitution might eliminate the need of a minimum income. Some might argue that some people would not work with a national minimum income-yet if some quit jobs to receive a minimum income that would free up a job opportunity for someone receiving a federal minimum income who is looking for a job that pays at least 300% more than the minimum.

Economic realism matters in a society that seeks a natural functioning social flow equivalent to that provided by nature from which any individual cold naturally extract subsistence with a less challenging demographic and legal situation. Society should not use NAIRU as a lever for eugenics policy to rid society perennial of those deemed undesirable. With bad social judgment, or even malign supernatural influence, a society might evolve itself out of existence.