4 ms·

If you double taxes, but the money is literally just going back into people's pockets, less administration fees of the UBI program, it's just income redistribut

If you double taxes, but the money is literally just going back into people's pockets, less administration fees of the UBI program, it's just income redistribution and can completely work.

jngreenlee 7y ago
>less administration fees of the UBI program Show me a success story where this didn't become a gigantic suck on the funds
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago
  There are many valid criticisms of social security, but the administrative costs are less than one percent.
dingo_bat 7y ago
Least admin fees is when my money stays in my pocket.
alistairSH 7y ago
Read the bill - many of CA's existing welfare programs are staying in place. Their INCREASING admin costs with this bill. UBI should replace most/all other welfare programs, if reducing admin costs is a goal.
- the_gastropod 7y ago
  I think GP's use of "less" meant "subtract", not that it would decrease the administrative costs of welfare programs. I don't think you can realistically (or ethically) get rid of welfare programs when introducing UBI. This is the issue I had with Andrew Yang's "Freedom Dividend" proposal, too. Some people are bad at managing money or have emergencies $12k won't cover. As a society, we cannot allow them to starve in the street because of this.
  - gremlinsinc 7y ago
    I think, UBI is great, but I think you really need a guaranteed baseline -- for people on hard times. Which is to say it should be whatever the base poverty line is. I think about $32,000. But at that rate it should definitely replace all other programs save medical. I also think VAT plus land ownership tax should be where the bulk should come from. Possibly also a rent-holder's tax for foreign national-owned properties that might be 10%/year of value. It should be household based too. Like perhaps 2,000 for first adult, 1k per adult in house, 500 per child. To be really ideal it needs to give people the freedom to 'choose' work as something to get 'more' reward. This would put supply of jobs above demand, and drive up wages too. Some would choose to focus on side projects, or art, science, studies, college, etc... Some might just play games all day, but who knows maybe they become e-sports athletes and earn thousands doing that. I think also though, single payer should come before UBI, not after. I think that should be first since people are dying because of that. I'd like to see states start trying to implement that on their own, maybe it works out great and other states copy them.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
winstonewert 7y ago
If the advocates of UBI would present it as plain and simple redistribution, I'd be more favorable to it. Instead, many seem oddly hesitant to acknowledge the increasing taxes side of it.

If you double taxes, but the money is literally just going back into people's pockets, less administration fees of the UBI program, it's just income redistribution and can completely work.

jngreenlee 7y ago

>less administration fees of the UBI program Show me a success story where this didn't become a gigantic suck on the funds

AnthonyMouse 7y ago
There are many valid criticisms of social security, but the administrative costs are less than one percent.

dingo_bat 7y ago

Least admin fees is when my money stays in my pocket.

alistairSH 7y ago

Read the bill - many of CA's existing welfare programs are staying in place. Their INCREASING admin costs with this bill. UBI should replace most/all other welfare programs, if reducing admin costs is a goal.

the_gastropod 7y ago
I think GP's use of "less" meant "subtract", not that it would decrease the administrative costs of welfare programs. I don't think you can realistically (or ethically) get rid of welfare programs when introducing UBI. This is the issue I had with Andrew Yang's "Freedom Dividend" proposal, too. Some people are bad at managing money or have emergencies $12k won't cover. As a society, we cannot allow them to starve in the street because of this.
- gremlinsinc 7y ago
  I think, UBI is great, but I think you really need a guaranteed baseline -- for people on hard times. Which is to say it should be whatever the base poverty line is. I think about $32,000. But at that rate it should definitely replace all other programs save medical. I also think VAT plus land ownership tax should be where the bulk should come from. Possibly also a rent-holder's tax for foreign national-owned properties that might be 10%/year of value. It should be household based too. Like perhaps 2,000 for first adult, 1k per adult in house, 500 per child. To be really ideal it needs to give people the freedom to 'choose' work as something to get 'more' reward. This would put supply of jobs above demand, and drive up wages too. Some would choose to focus on side projects, or art, science, studies, college, etc... Some might just play games all day, but who knows maybe they become e-sports athletes and earn thousands doing that. I think also though, single payer should come before UBI, not after. I think that should be first since people are dying because of that. I'd like to see states start trying to implement that on their own, maybe it works out great and other states copy them.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

winstonewert 7y ago

If the advocates of UBI would present it as plain and simple redistribution, I'd be more favorable to it. Instead, many seem oddly hesitant to acknowledge the increasing taxes side of it.