3 ms·
One of the arguments for UBI is that it is not means-tested so the administrative overhead is much lower as compared with things like France's RSA (if I underst
by aptwebapps 10y ago
One of the arguments for UBI is that it is not means-tested so the administrative overhead is much lower as compared with things like France's RSA (if I understand what that is properly).
- weddpros 10y agoI think it's one of the problems of UBI: it can only exist in addition to all other social benefits, because it can't solve every situation appropriately. Disabled people will need more help than a fit 22yo guy for instance. Social benefits are individualized: UBI can't be the same for everyone and erase existing social benefits. Also, governments HATE destroying public jobs ;-)
- dragonwriter 10y ago> I think it's one of the problems of UBI: it can only exist in addition to all other social benefits, because it can't solve every situation appropriately. UBI probably for some extended time into the future would require some other social benefits, but to say that it requires "all" other social benefits is simply wrong. It wouldn't take a very high level of UBI to completely displace the need for existing General Assistance programs in the US, it would take a higher level to replace SNAP and TANF.
- hx87 10y agoAn effective UBI would require some sort of universal healthcare system, which can be wholly public, or a basic public system with a private system on top, to take care of the differences in need between different people.