4 ms·

A Universal Basic Income is not necessarily paid to everyone, at least not directly. A UBI means a certain income level is guaranteed, if you are earning more t

A Universal Basic Income is not necessarily paid to everyone, at least not directly. A UBI means a certain income level is guaranteed, if you are earning more than the guaranteed level, you may not be given anything in addition. This is most clearly demonstrated by one proposed implementation of UBI, namely, a negative income tax. A negative income tax would entail those earning below the guaranteed level being paid enough to raise their income to the guaranteed level. Those earning more than the guaranteed level are taxed. Negative Income Tax is pretty much the only implementation of UBI I personally could get behind. I just wouldn't be able to support an implementation of a UBI that pays Bill Gates the same amount as a person born with a severe disability (which obviously they had no choice about being born with).

MawNicker 11y ago
It wasn't Bill Gates' choice to be born without a disability. Honestly, I despise your opinion. Bill Gates pays so much more in taxes that a basic income would hardly matter to him. It's just part of his tax calculation: X% - UBI. It's nothing to us either. There aren't many Bill Gates out there. Also, in this way nothing needs to be measured. It's simply: Are you human? Here's your UBI. Do you have income? Here's how much you owe in taxes. The system for everyone should be the same. It's simpler and more fair. Bill Gates deserves to know that if he lost it all tomorrow we would take care of him. We can make one system that ensures everyone is cared for. The sickly and the ambitious. I don't think we have the proficiency necessary to keep people from falling through the cracks otherwise. Maybe in very specific cases (like Bill Gates) but not at scale. There are disabilities that exist that we don't even know about yet.
dvainsencher 11y ago
I won't argue about definitions, except to say I am following [1], and suggest you do the same (because it is a use of words that matches their general meanings, not because it is there). Unless taxation and reporting are made trivial (which is hard without giving up on privacy including cash), the poorest do not have the money or time to jump through hoops. Hence UBI, having the minimal requirements, will help the most of the poorest. This more than compensates for the (arguable, but I'll concede it) bug of giving some money to the rich as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
Rainymood 11y ago
>A Universal Basic Income is not necessarily paid to everyone, at least not directly. A UBI means a certain income level is guaranteed, if you are earning more than the guaranteed level, you may not be given anything in addition. Well that is fucked up? They dont call it a "UNIVERSAL" basic income. Yeah let's give a basic income to EVERYONE, EXCEPT ... that makes 0 sense. You just described wellfare really. Universal or bust. Everyone or no-one imo. It's a universal basic income afterall. Not a conditional basic income.

MawNicker 11y ago

It wasn't Bill Gates' choice to be born without a disability. Honestly, I despise your opinion. Bill Gates pays so much more in taxes that a basic income would hardly matter to him. It's just part of his tax calculation: X% - UBI. It's nothing to us either. There aren't many Bill Gates out there. Also, in this way nothing needs to be measured. It's simply: Are you human? Here's your UBI. Do you have income? Here's how much you owe in taxes. The system for everyone should be the same. It's simpler and more fair. Bill Gates deserves to know that if he lost it all tomorrow we would take care of him. We can make one system that ensures everyone is cared for. The sickly and the ambitious. I don't think we have the proficiency necessary to keep people from falling through the cracks otherwise. Maybe in very specific cases (like Bill Gates) but not at scale. There are disabilities that exist that we don't even know about yet.

dvainsencher 11y ago

I won't argue about definitions, except to say I am following [1], and suggest you do the same (because it is a use of words that matches their general meanings, not because it is there). Unless taxation and reporting are made trivial (which is hard without giving up on privacy including cash), the poorest do not have the money or time to jump through hoops. Hence UBI, having the minimal requirements, will help the most of the poorest. This more than compensates for the (arguable, but I'll concede it) bug of giving some money to the rich as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

Rainymood 11y ago

>A Universal Basic Income is not necessarily paid to everyone, at least not directly. A UBI means a certain income level is guaranteed, if you are earning more than the guaranteed level, you may not be given anything in addition. Well that is fucked up? They dont call it a "UNIVERSAL" basic income. Yeah let's give a basic income to EVERYONE, EXCEPT ... that makes 0 sense. You just described wellfare really. Universal or bust. Everyone or no-one imo. It's a universal basic income afterall. Not a conditional basic income.