4 ms·

> UBI is also a no-go in terms of "universal". It's just too unfair. What's unfair is to take away someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job.

> UBI is also a no-go in terms of "universal". It's just too unfair. What's unfair is to take away someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. That diminishes or removes the incentive to actually find a job.

lelanthran 3y ago
> What's unfair is to take away someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Did I say otherwise?
- planede 3y ago
  No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?
  - lelanthran 3y ago
    > No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither? Me agreeing that taking away > someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others). I don't understand how you can confuse the two. It's possible to have what almost everyone would consider a fair welfare system. It's not possible to have what even a significant minority would consider to be a fair UBI system. Welfare systems have a goal of ensuring that people who need more get more. UBI has the goal of ensuring that no one gets more than anyone else.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - planede 3y ago
      UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.
      - lelanthran 3y ago
        > UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO. Another welfare system in addition to the existing welfare system is quite undesirable for most proponents of UBI who (like the parent I responded to earlier) present "no other welfare system" as a benefit of UBI.
        planede 3y ago
        I like the idea of UBI, but I agree with you that it can't replace all welfare. But UBI replacing unemployment welfare is not another welfare system in addition to the existing one. It would simplify the existing welfare system by replacing a complex part (unemployment welfare) with a simpler one (UBI). I think it worth considering UBI in this light. I'm not a proponent of eliminating all other welfare.
        mantas 3y ago
        However, most UBI theories rely on taking all welfare funds and redistributing them evenly. If you take unemployment welfare only, you're looking into massive tax increases or UBI that won't provide even very basic living.

lelanthran 3y ago

> What's unfair is to take away someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Did I say otherwise?

planede 3y ago
No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?
- lelanthran 3y ago
  > No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither? Me agreeing that taking away > someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others). I don't understand how you can confuse the two. It's possible to have what almost everyone would consider a fair welfare system. It's not possible to have what even a significant minority would consider to be a fair UBI system. Welfare systems have a goal of ensuring that people who need more get more. UBI has the goal of ensuring that no one gets more than anyone else.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - planede 3y ago
    UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.
    - lelanthran 3y ago
      > UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO. Another welfare system in addition to the existing welfare system is quite undesirable for most proponents of UBI who (like the parent I responded to earlier) present "no other welfare system" as a benefit of UBI.
      - planede 3y ago
        I like the idea of UBI, but I agree with you that it can't replace all welfare. But UBI replacing unemployment welfare is not another welfare system in addition to the existing one. It would simplify the existing welfare system by replacing a complex part (unemployment welfare) with a simpler one (UBI). I think it worth considering UBI in this light. I'm not a proponent of eliminating all other welfare.
        mantas 3y ago
        However, most UBI theories rely on taking all welfare funds and redistributing them evenly. If you take unemployment welfare only, you're looking into massive tax increases or UBI that won't provide even very basic living.