4 ms·

Honest question, is UBI considered a capitalistic solution? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post.

• rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  Richard Nixon hailed it as a conservative answer to poverty because instead of picking-and-choosing people who needed help and those who didn't, and measuring exactly how much help they needed (food stamps yes, welfare check no, housing voucher yes, and so on...), it simply provides for a standard of living that allows people to choose for themselves how to allocate it, instead of being determined by bean-counting bureaucrats.
• mason240 11y ago
  I think the answer to that depends on whether or not you think the current economies of the US/Canada/Europe/Scandinavia are capitalist or not (I do, and am myself a capitalist). If so, then yes it is. We already tax income for redistribution programs - UBI is just a very large, very even redistribution programs. With UBI, the economy would still based on capitalism, using money, private ownership of capital and property, and using all those things to create profits (which would then be taxed). People will develop marketable skills to earn more money (which would be taxed). All this is the same as it is now.
• dibujante 11y ago
  Yes. It does not interfere with private ownership or private economy whatsoever. The notion that wealth transfers are socialism / communism is a misunderstanding that has developed due to political rhetoric in the United States. By way of example, if you are trying to ensure that everyone gets a loaf of bread: a communist solution is taking over the bakery and ordering its workers to produce a loaf of bread for everyone. A capitalist solution is taxing the owners of the bakery and then transferring everyone money equal to the price of a loaf of bread. UBI is clearly in the latter camp.