> No that is only one potential implementation of UBI, and generally the only one acknowledged by the Anti-UBI crowd (in a fear mongering sort of way). Because

> No that is only one potential implementation of UBI, and generally the only one acknowledged by the Anti-UBI crowd (in a fear mongering sort of way). Because it's the most likely to be implemented and is the only one being touted by presidential candidates. > And my understanding with housing is 19 Million people are eligible/qualify, but only 25% get assistance Is that 25% get approved out of 19 million applying, or just 19 million are eligible but most dont apply? That's an important distinction. > Those numbers are very consistent with the percentage of wealth owned by these groups. You're talking about wealth, I'm talking about investments. Taxing capital gains at a higher rate would just lead to less investment. Less real estate being built which in turn means higher housing prices, less VC funding so less opportunity for jobs, etc. It's taxed lower because it's a higher risk. > That seems totally arbitrary It's not. At no point does the government deserve more money than I do for my own work. Yes the government provides that safety net, schools, roads, etc but that is paid for on an individual level way before 50%. I agree that we need to strengthen laws that allow companies to hide money, but at the same time every single one of us tries to pay the lowest amount every year come tax time; so I can't blame corps for doing the same.