3 ms·

Originally, no. Because originally UBI was designed to be used not as another social program, but in lieu of existing programs. When Friedman invented it, the

Originally, no. Because originally UBI was designed to be used not as another social program, but in lieu of existing programs. When Friedman invented it, the idea was to get rid of things like public schools or whatever other public welfare program, fire all the public workers involved and instead give money to people so they would choose those services in the open market.

Barrin92 5y ago
As far as I know that is still the case with Yang's UBI, which is why I brought it up in my original post. "The most important part of Mr. Yang’s 2020 guaranteed income plan was not the size of the checks but how he intended to pay for them. He promised to fund the program by implementing some new tax policies and “consolidating some welfare programs.” Anyone who wanted in would first have to make a choice: continue to get the bulk of the direct government benefits they currently received, or forfeit them and instead get $1,000 a month. Other than Social Security retirement, disability benefits (and potentially some other credits), no one could get both a Freedom Dividend and government assistance." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/16/opinion/andrew-yang-ubi-nyc-mayor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/16/opinion/andrew-yang-ubi-n...
- throwaway34241 5y ago
  To clarify a bit, he didn't go nearly as far as Friedman did. As far as I am aware he was still in favor of public schools, dealing with health care separately, etc. And he proposed people with benefits currently higher than the UBI level be able to stay on them (although presumably people on lower levels of benefits would switch to the higher-level UBI payments that don't come with any strings attached).