2 ms·

>>> The reason why it is not done is because it would lay bare all the inequities in the system, Is that a common justification for UBI? I have not heard it bu

• lotsofpulp 5y ago
  It is a personal conjecture. Every time I come across price obfuscation, or not doing the straight forward thing, it is because the seller does not want the transaction to be as transparent as possible. Tax deductions, credits, student loans, subsidized mortgages, taxpayer funded pensions, Medicaid reimbursing differently (lower) than Medicare reimbursing differently than Tricare, and so on and so forth. It is always a political decision to reduce total costs, or drive the benefit to certain populations, or use liberal assumptions to present future costs as less than they really are and so on and so forth. If we want people to have a house, give them money to buy a house. Or a house. Same with education, healthcare, everything. The big problem with this is cash has to be accounted for today, transparently, and cleanly. There is no option to muddy the waters.
  • lifeisstillgood 5y ago
    I think I heartily agree. Openness is a great default, and while I will say a lot of things are more complicated than I know, this will at least drive the discussion into the open. IIRR Fannie Mae originally had explicit anti-Black lending policies. I do wonder how that would have been dealt with in a more open environment.