It's interesting to me, because it doesn't seem that hard or wrong to tax stagnant dollars. And I suspect it would solve a lot of the inflation woes that might

It's interesting to me, because it doesn't seem that hard or wrong to tax stagnant dollars. And I suspect it would solve a lot of the inflation woes that might happen with UBI, as well as a lot of the US economic woes. Every time we look at fixing an issue like this, it seems like we're only looking at the half of the problem that involves creating the benefit, because paying for it is unpopular. But wealth accrual in this economy is a net drag. The tax side of trickle-down means that we're only ever working with a trickle to power major public benefits that could otherwise consistently run our economy, and provide robustness where we have a lot of weakness. You could pay for UBI by heavily taxing stock portfolios of the richest people. + 10% tax on the richest 1% of stock portfolios would raise about 2.3T (source CNBC). It would also take money from people who "can't spend it all" (something Bezos has literally claimed, he has trouble with), and give it to the 300M people who actually have something to spend it on, as evidenced by the huge boom in the economy created by the stimulus package. It's not that you can't find the money to tax this, it's that no one has the political will to tax anything.