3 ms·

Good first approximation but I think there are some limitations. For example, basic Income advocates do not say that everyone (children, for example) get the ca

Good first approximation but I think there are some limitations. For example, basic Income advocates do not say that everyone (children, for example) get the cash. So your denominator of 360M is incorrect and should be reduced by at least 75M. A 2006 study put the cost at 1.8Tr. And then goes on to detail how it can be done, largely by eliminating new tax loopholes versus introducing new taxes: http://www.usbig.net/papers/144-Sheahen-RefundableTaxCredit.pdf http://www.usbig.net/papers/144-Sheahen-RefundableTaxCredit..... For a less academic answer, the author Scott Saterns has spent a lot of time researching this topic and even lived on a simulated basic income for a year: https://medium.com/basic-income/what-if-you-got-1-000-a-month-just-for-being-alive-i-decided-to-find-out-9e8591976c37 https://medium.com/basic-income/what-if-you-got-1-000-a-mont...

trendia 9y ago
This is funny because he has the exact same conclusion that I have regarding the costs--that the UBI would be around $10,000 and that the breakeven would be $50,000--yet he believes that to be feasible while I don't. But the difference between our views is this: politically it's infeasible because middle class people are more politically active. People making over $50,000/year will lose money on thus deal. Thus, even if it's better for people making less than $50,000, it is unlikely to ever be enacted. Finally, he talks about fixing tax "loopholes" but in reality he's talking about removing deductions. Those deductions are supported by many people... go ahead and try to remove the mortgage interest deduction, and see how far you can get! (polling support for its removal is almost zero)
grahamburger 9y ago
Withholding UBI from children would be a devastating blow to exactly the people who need the most help - unemployable single parents and their children. Of course, we could supplement their UBI with means tested additional assistance, but ... Then we're back where we started.

trendia 9y ago

This is funny because he has the exact same conclusion that I have regarding the costs--that the UBI would be around $10,000 and that the breakeven would be $50,000--yet he believes that to be feasible while I don't. But the difference between our views is this: politically it's infeasible because middle class people are more politically active. People making over $50,000/year will lose money on thus deal. Thus, even if it's better for people making less than $50,000, it is unlikely to ever be enacted. Finally, he talks about fixing tax "loopholes" but in reality he's talking about removing deductions. Those deductions are supported by many people... go ahead and try to remove the mortgage interest deduction, and see how far you can get! (polling support for its removal is almost zero)

grahamburger 9y ago

Withholding UBI from children would be a devastating blow to exactly the people who need the most help - unemployable single parents and their children. Of course, we could supplement their UBI with means tested additional assistance, but ... Then we're back where we started.