32 ms·
Yes. Obviously. So the "cost of UBI" is clearly not $10k times (number of humans in the USA), but more like $10k times (number of eligible people making under $
by vehementi 10y ago
Yes. Obviously. So the "cost of UBI" is clearly not $10k times (number of humans in the USA), but more like $10k times (number of eligible people making under $10k). The article omitting this pretty important thing basically discredits it and probably its parent site
- mason240 10y ago>So the "cost of UBI" is clearly not $10k times (number of humans in the USA), but more like $10k times (number of eligible people making under $10k). It is "$10k times (number of humans in the USA)," because the "number of eligible people" IS the number of humans in the USA.
- drabiega 10y agoYou left out the "making under $10k" part, which is the whole point.
- mason240 10y agoI didn't leave it out because UBI isn't means tested or income based.
- vehementi 10y agoThey're not explicitly eligible, but rather implicitly eligible, because of the tax increase on the top end to cancel out the $10k they don't need and to pay for any gap that still needs closing after we redirect money from existing systems. The people who as a result of this policy and the taxes net money is small, and that is the real cost. Not $3T which is a bald faced lie.