> Bob's work isn't subsidizing Fred's lifestyle unfairly (at least under Yang's proposal) because the UBI is paid for by a tax on consumption (the VAT) So then

> Bob's work isn't subsidizing Fred's lifestyle unfairly (at least under Yang's proposal) because the UBI is paid for by a tax on consumption (the VAT) So then it's Bob's consumption that subsidizes Fred? That doesn't seem fair either. When Bob consumes, he spends money he earned through work. One way or another, money he earned is taken from him and given to Fred.