4 ms·
It can be structured as an income tax that starts out negative. Everyone of working age is paid the UBI, which is designed to act as the safety net. This frees
by erpellan 6y ago
It can be structured as an income tax that starts out negative. Everyone of working age is paid the UBI, which is designed to act as the safety net. This frees up a ton of overhead as means-testing, benefit fraud, etc. all goes away.
Then when you get a job, the UBI starts to reduce, at a rate LESS than the money you are earning. So if you're paid $1000 monthly UBI, and get a $1000 job, it might reduce UBI by $500. So you're always better off working. You'd probably want a sliding scale so maybe the first couple of hundred only reduces your UBI by 0.20 per dollar, or whatever. It can be structured so the net tax take for the government is the same. Yes this probably means people earning more than say $100,000 pay a bit more in tax. I'm okay with that.
- Kaiyou 6y agoWorking 40h weeks for an extra $500 isn't a good deal. As long as I can sustain life without working, not working at all will always beat getting some scraps. If there aren't repercussions for not working, than why bother?
- snovv_crash 6y agoThe idea is that you'd be able to sustain if you lived _very_ frugally. Generally, people don't enjoy that. They like to eat the nice food, go to places, buy things, all of which wouldn't be covered by the UBI.
- Kaiyou 6y agoI lived my entire live frugally. I enjoy that. Working 40h weeks on the other hand isn't all that fun, even though now I have thousands of dollars to blow every month. If I had the choice I'd live frugally and not work. I'm eating the same thing everyday, like to stay at home and hate to buy things. I'm working because I know it's necessary.