Low is positioning this as a response to "job losses" associated with automation. https://a28.asmdc.org/press-releases/20200221-expand-economic-security-wake-a

Low is positioning this as a response to "job losses" associated with automation. https://a28.asmdc.org/press-releases/20200221-expand-economic-security-wake-automation-assemblymember-low-introduces https://a28.asmdc.org/press-releases/20200221-expand-economi... This makes no sense to me. $12K/yr is a nice supplement to low incomes. But let's say I'm a trucker making $60K/yr and I lose my job. Making 20% of my previous income is definitely nice, but it's not exactly moving the needle that dramatically. If you're primarily concerned about job losses due to automation, why not radically increase unemployment benefits and make vocational education for adults tuition free (and maybe even offer a cost of living stipend for unemployed adults who retrain)? This approach is a LOT less expensive and far more targeted. I fully support a UBI as a form of income security, but as a corrective for technological unemployment it just seems like a really blunt, and ultimately not terribly effective instrument.