2 ms·

> $24 million guaranteed income program to give 2,000 poor families $1,000 per month This is really missing the "U" in "UBI". That aside, how does UBI (combin

by tyrust 5y ago

> $24 million guaranteed income program to give 2,000 poor families $1,000 per month This is really missing the "U" in "UBI". That aside, how does UBI (combined with a progressive tax system) "lock in structural disparities"?

b9a2cab5 5y ago
Not the OP, but in general when there is high socioeconomic mobility in society, high taxes disproportionately impact high earners who are not yet wealthy. If you're already wealthy you can draw a subsistence income from investments and be taxed at a low rate, while paying 0 rent since you own property. If you're not wealthy, you need to make enough to pay (high) rents and also build up your wealth, which means you get doubly screwed by high tax rates. Presumably UBI would be funded by increases in taxes, so this logic would apply. We can argue about whether the US has high socioeconomic mobility but the majority of millionaires in the US are self-made [1]. It is perhaps questionable whether 20th wealth percentile poor can make it to the 99th percentile, but I think it's much easier for a 60th percentile person in the US to make it to the 99th percentile compared to Europe. [1]: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120719005724/en/Fidelity%C2%AE-Survey-Finds-86-Percent-of-Millionaires-Are-Self-Made https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120719005724/en/Fid...
- tyrust 5y ago
  Your criticism is about the tax system, not UBI. If you want to change the tax system to target those issues, that sounds like a good idea. It's sorta orthogonal to the conversation about where those taxes go, though.
  - b9a2cab5 5y ago
    Like I said, UBI would be funded by large tax increases, so instituting UBI would directly fuel those inequalities.
    - tyrust 5y ago
      By your logic, any tax increase will fuel inequalities. This is a reasonable line of thinking (although I do not know its validity), but serves nothing more than to derail a conversation about tax-funded benefits.
      - b9a2cab5 5y ago
        The conversation is whether UBI will fuel existing inequalities or remove them. I argue it will exacerbate inequalities because of the taxes needed to pay for it. How is this any more derailing than the OP's comment about Garcetti?

by tyrust 5y ago

b9a2cab5 5y ago

Not the OP, but in general when there is high socioeconomic mobility in society, high taxes disproportionately impact high earners who are not yet wealthy. If you're already wealthy you can draw a subsistence income from investments and be taxed at a low rate, while paying 0 rent since you own property. If you're not wealthy, you need to make enough to pay (high) rents and also build up your wealth, which means you get doubly screwed by high tax rates. Presumably UBI would be funded by increases in taxes, so this logic would apply. We can argue about whether the US has high socioeconomic mobility but the majority of millionaires in the US are self-made [1]. It is perhaps questionable whether 20th wealth percentile poor can make it to the 99th percentile, but I think it's much easier for a 60th percentile person in the US to make it to the 99th percentile compared to Europe. [1]: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120719005724/en/Fidelity%C2%AE-Survey-Finds-86-Percent-of-Millionaires-Are-Self-Made https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120719005724/en/Fid...

tyrust 5y ago
Your criticism is about the tax system, not UBI. If you want to change the tax system to target those issues, that sounds like a good idea. It's sorta orthogonal to the conversation about where those taxes go, though.
- b9a2cab5 5y ago
  Like I said, UBI would be funded by large tax increases, so instituting UBI would directly fuel those inequalities.
  - tyrust 5y ago
    By your logic, any tax increase will fuel inequalities. This is a reasonable line of thinking (although I do not know its validity), but serves nothing more than to derail a conversation about tax-funded benefits.
    - b9a2cab5 5y ago
      The conversation is whether UBI will fuel existing inequalities or remove them. I argue it will exacerbate inequalities because of the taxes needed to pay for it. How is this any more derailing than the OP's comment about Garcetti?