4 ms·

I'm a libertarian, and don't support a welfare state in general. I view UBI as a great replacement for current welfare programs including food stamps. It largel

by pitaj 8y ago

I'm a libertarian, and don't support a welfare state in general. I view UBI as a great replacement for current welfare programs including food stamps. It largely eliminate the "welfare gap", where when people earn more money, their benefits start dropping off, resulting in a reversed incentive structure leading to trapping people in poverty. UBI implemented as a negative income tax would result in much less waste and more freedom to the beneficiaries. It's also politically viable as it could be seen as more "fair" since technically everyone receives it. Edit: I think the "automation displacing human jobs" argument is easily the weakest in favor of implementing a UBI, especially since it's not necessarily economically realistic.

andrew_ 8y ago
Interesting perspective, and something I had not considered previously.
thorell 8y ago
My preferred argument in favor is that depression can render government form-filled disability bureaucracy into an unnavigable hellscape and since it's one of the most common disabilities, a lot of human misery could be spared by making a living income automatically accessible.
- commandlinefan 8y ago
  > a lot of human misery could be spared by making a living income automatically accessible You don't honestly think that those of us who have doubts about UBI are actually cackling and rubbing our hands together gleefully over all the human misery we're causing by denying living income to the miserable, do you? Of course that would be nice - and I do believe that humanity will eventually get to that point, but we're not there yet. We'll have flying, self-driving cars long before we have the level of automation we need to let everybody kick back and pursue whatever intellectual interests they find.
  - thorell 8y ago
    Of course I don't think that. I'm not even certain I support UBI in general. That's just an argument I found compelling compared to others.
mmirate 8y ago
I keep forgetting that UBI, implemented properly as you describe, in a nation with pre-existing Robin-Hooding ... is a net-gain for liberty. Yet, given history, I doubt that the median-minus-one politician could have the courage to end the current welfare programs if and when a UBI system is enacted. So I'm ... ambivalent ... about what to think of UBI.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  Since you probably can't implement a sufficient UBI to provide an income floor that removes the need for other programs initially (at least, anytime soon), but instead need to start low and ramp up with productivity gains, you need a phase-in mechanism. You can do this in a way that avoids forcing politicians to have the will to eliminate existing means tested programs but achieve that in effect by simply, add party of the phase in, specifying that UBI income counts as income in applying benefit formulas for existing programs. It'll be much easier to kill each of the programs when no one has a low enough income to qualify for it.

by pitaj 8y ago

andrew_ 8y ago

Interesting perspective, and something I had not considered previously.

thorell 8y ago

My preferred argument in favor is that depression can render government form-filled disability bureaucracy into an unnavigable hellscape and since it's one of the most common disabilities, a lot of human misery could be spared by making a living income automatically accessible.

commandlinefan 8y ago
> a lot of human misery could be spared by making a living income automatically accessible You don't honestly think that those of us who have doubts about UBI are actually cackling and rubbing our hands together gleefully over all the human misery we're causing by denying living income to the miserable, do you? Of course that would be nice - and I do believe that humanity will eventually get to that point, but we're not there yet. We'll have flying, self-driving cars long before we have the level of automation we need to let everybody kick back and pursue whatever intellectual interests they find.
- thorell 8y ago
  Of course I don't think that. I'm not even certain I support UBI in general. That's just an argument I found compelling compared to others.

mmirate 8y ago

I keep forgetting that UBI, implemented properly as you describe, in a nation with pre-existing Robin-Hooding ... is a net-gain for liberty. Yet, given history, I doubt that the median-minus-one politician could have the courage to end the current welfare programs if and when a UBI system is enacted. So I'm ... ambivalent ... about what to think of UBI.

dragonwriter 8y ago
Since you probably can't implement a sufficient UBI to provide an income floor that removes the need for other programs initially (at least, anytime soon), but instead need to start low and ramp up with productivity gains, you need a phase-in mechanism. You can do this in a way that avoids forcing politicians to have the will to eliminate existing means tested programs but achieve that in effect by simply, add party of the phase in, specifying that UBI income counts as income in applying benefit formulas for existing programs. It'll be much easier to kill each of the programs when no one has a low enough income to qualify for it.