4 ms·
Look at it this way: 1. The US is already spending over a trillion a year on welfare 2. These programs have high administrative costs and create negative ince
by chillacy 6y ago
Look at it this way:
1. The US is already spending over a trillion a year on welfare
2. These programs have high administrative costs and create negative incentives to work (you can make more not working than working)
3. UBI has low administrative costs, does not have extra disincentive to work (because you won't lose it by working, and most UBI proposals are poverty subsistence anyways)
There's plenty of conservative economists who support flavors of UBI. Charles Murray and Greg Mankiew to name a few. Yang's UBI was sort of centrist, it actually eliminated several existing social programs which would arguably be better replaced with the UBI, but did not go as far as Murray's which eliminates social security, medicare, etc.