3 ms·
UBI however would mostly transfer this cost to high-income earners (if financed through taxation) or capital owners (if financed by debt/printing money). Basica
by qwytw 5y ago
UBI however would mostly transfer this cost to high-income earners (if financed through taxation) or capital owners (if financed by debt/printing money). Basically it's just a form of progressive taxation with a large safety need (without a means test) at the bottom, which would function as a mechanism to decrease inequality (which some economists believe negatively affects economic growth). Also another factor (and I'm personally not fully convinced on this) is that it would would actually result in higher overall productivity longterm by giving more people the opportunity to invest their time into gaining new skills etc.
- ChrisLomont 5y ago> UBI however would mostly transfer this cost to high-income earners Show me your napkin math. I've been all through this so many times that hand-wavy claims are not enough - simple estimates will show you how these claims do not work. And if it was a simple we getting some more taxes somewhere, do you not think we'd already gather that tax? It's not like there's money that is easily taxable either politically (or sometimes, even economicially). Sure, if we could magically get more money, and get it from places that are not current places, and ignore all effects of giving such money yo people on inflation and the economy, and get it so that there are zero side effects, maybe you'd be on to something. But even in that case, it's still wiser to spend this money on better targeted things than simply handing to everyone with no regard who needs it.