In economics, we talk a lot about the “free market,” but is our labor market a part of that?
Millions of people today take jobs they don’t want, for wages that don’t reflect their value, simply because they need to survive. That desperation isn’t efficiency — it’s coercion. It props up wasteful, low-productivity jobs and bloated payrolls.
Imagine instead if every American adult was assured a guaranteed livable income (GLI), recalibrated quarterly to keep pace with costs. No red tape, no patchwork of outdated welfare programs. Just one simple floor: enough to survive securely, but not enough to provide luxury.
From there, everyone chooses — work more to earn more, or live on the baseline. If you earn less, you’re topped up to the GLI; if you earn more, you get nothing extra. Simple, fair and universal.
That’s when the market truly becomes free. The unmotivated step out of the labor pool by choice. Employers no longer pad payrolls with disengaged workers just to fill slots. Instead, they must attract motivated employees and pay them what they’re worth.
In this system, efficiency isn’t just government savings — it’s structural. One capable, ambitious worker replaces three reluctant ones, doing more, doing it better and earning a premium for it. And employers pay more per individual, but it is offset by the increased efficiency and engagement.
The result is fewer bad jobs, higher wages for good ones, and businesses forced to innovate rather than exploit. Jobs that can’t justify themselves above the baseline either improve, automate or disappear — exactly as a true market should dictate. Meanwhile, workers are liberated to pursue roles that match their talents and ambitions, not ones they’re forced into out of desperation. Creativity and entrepreneurship would be promoted as well, boosting innovation and progress.
Some may object that people will “get paid for nothing.” But the guarantee is universal — anyone who feels that way is free to join them. Most won’t. Most people want to work, create and contribute. This system would ensure that those people would have a market that appropriately values and identifies them.
Simply stated, work should be a choice, not a sentence. Engagement drives efficiency.
Beyond economics, the social benefits would be profound — especially here in Southwest Washington and across the West Coast, where housing costs, homelessness and addiction strain communities. A guaranteed income floor would reduce poverty-driven crime, stabilize families and give people dignity without forcing them into dead-end cycles.
By removing desperation and giving people real choice, freedom and purpose, we’d ease social pressures, strengthen civic life, and allow people to contribute on their own terms — whether through paid work, caregiving or community service.
It’s time to stop patching old systems and start imagining bold ones. A universal income floor would reduce waste, increase efficiency and liberate the workforce — all while letting the free market finally work as it should, truly unleashing the American economy.
Jordan Slach
Longview
•••
Letters To The Editor
Readers are encouraged to express their views by writing to the editor of The Reflector. Letters are limited 500 words. Deadline is noon Thursday. Writers are limited to two letters per calendar quarter. All letters must be signed with name, address, plus phone number for verification. Items submitted are subject to editing and will become the property of this newspaper. Opinions expressed in the Letters to the Editor section of this newspaper do not necessarily reflect those of The Reflector or its staff.
Email: letters@thereflector.com
Mail: The Reflector, Attention: Letters to the Editor,
209 E Main St., Suite 121 Battle Ground, WA 98604
