4 ms·

Any sane UBI replaces most, if not all, other benefit programs.

snapplebobapple 2y ago
It just doesn't work though mathematically. If you take my home country of Canada, giving 40k a year to every person 18 and over would cost around 1.3 trillion (assuming a modest 3% admin cost) vs a current federal budget of around 400 billion, with the provinces it's likely around 1 trillion. SO just to fund a ubi that would not be very comfortable for anyone to live on, especially with a family, would require raising 30 % more revenue. This does not account for the large percentage of the budget that is just not cheaper to provide privately through individuals paying from their ubi (i.e. military, healthcare, policing, transport, protection of public forests, regulation of food and drugs, education). even if you cut all levels of government spending to the bone leaving only the stuff it makes complete sense to provide communally, you are left with maybe 300 billion (but likely much lower because I haven't analyzed the cost of promised retirement benefits at all), which is roughly 9k per year per over 18 person, which isn't enough to come anywhere near the numbers supporters of UBI want. That means much higher taxes but our taxes are already insane and so will likely not extract that kind of money from the populace, especially when they are being incentivized not to work with a 9k check each year, most of us will tell the government to pound sand and just cut our work hours.
- singpolyma3 2y ago
  Our taxes in Canada are a bit low, especially on the wealthy. However your argument seems to stem from "if we give it to everyone and cut nothing where does the money come from". Well, a part of it comes from all the welfare programs it replaces (OAS, Ontario Works, etc) and a huge amount of it doesn't really exist (since for the vast number of people you'll tax back 100% of it anyway). For the amount that's left, yes, one needs to choose a funding strategy. A real policy play with all the data available would have the needed numbers to begin to decide what that looks like
lelanthran 2y ago
> Any sane UBI replaces most, if not all, other benefit programs. Elsethread I wrote: >> Secondly, you have to be prepared to let people starve to death in the streets. If that non-insignificant chunk of people who have gambling/alcohol/sex/drug addictions blow their entire income on the first day of the month on slots/booze/prostitutes/drugs, any funds you set aside for them means that what you have is UBI + existing welfare, not UBI instead of existing welfare. Are you willing to let people starve to death?
- phatskat 2y ago
  > Are you willing to let people starve to death? How is this any different from how things work now? “UBI”, to me, and in a society where work is largely a non-human task, needs to encompass housing, food, etc. In a world where jobs don’t exist in the way they do now, UBI needs to be a stop gap while we completely overhaul what it means to have an _economy_.
  - lelanthran 2y ago
    >> > Are you willing to let people starve to death? > How is this any different from how things work now? Now there are specific (and often means-tested) welfare benefits available to people. Replacing all of those benefits with a single (non-means-tested) cash payment because: >>> Any sane UBI replaces most, if not all, other benefit programs. means you have to be ready to let other people die for your principles.
    - phatskat 2y ago
      I get what you mean, and I don’t think the two can’t coexist. Some benefits like SNAP would probably go away - what’s the difference in $500 for food vs the lump of UBI? If you’re getting $4k/month, then the need for those specific benefits goes away. If you’re disabled, UBI doesn’t need to replace your disability benefits, but could supplement it. Imagine having that $2k/month for disability on top of the $4k for UBI: people could actually focus that $2k on treatment instead of just using it to barely get by.
- 2y ago
Zanfa 2y ago
It replaces a small portion of benefit programs at best. Any sort of a serious disability and/or health related program will still need the same amount of resources to support people who need something other than money. And no UBI payment can cover market rates for these sorts of services.

It just doesn't work though mathematically. If you take my home country of Canada, giving 40k a year to every person 18 and over would cost around 1.3 trillion (assuming a modest 3% admin cost) vs a current federal budget of around 400 billion, with the provinces it's likely around 1 trillion. SO just to fund a ubi that would not be very comfortable for anyone to live on, especially with a family, would require raising 30 % more revenue. This does not account for the large percentage of the budget that is just not cheaper to provide privately through individuals paying from their ubi (i.e. military, healthcare, policing, transport, protection of public forests, regulation of food and drugs, education). even if you cut all levels of government spending to the bone leaving only the stuff it makes complete sense to provide communally, you are left with maybe 300 billion (but likely much lower because I haven't analyzed the cost of promised retirement benefits at all), which is roughly 9k per year per over 18 person, which isn't enough to come anywhere near the numbers supporters of UBI want. That means much higher taxes but our taxes are already insane and so will likely not extract that kind of money from the populace, especially when they are being incentivized not to work with a 9k check each year, most of us will tell the government to pound sand and just cut our work hours.

singpolyma3 2y ago
Our taxes in Canada are a bit low, especially on the wealthy. However your argument seems to stem from "if we give it to everyone and cut nothing where does the money come from". Well, a part of it comes from all the welfare programs it replaces (OAS, Ontario Works, etc) and a huge amount of it doesn't really exist (since for the vast number of people you'll tax back 100% of it anyway). For the amount that's left, yes, one needs to choose a funding strategy. A real policy play with all the data available would have the needed numbers to begin to decide what that looks like

lelanthran 2y ago

> Any sane UBI replaces most, if not all, other benefit programs. Elsethread I wrote: >> Secondly, you have to be prepared to let people starve to death in the streets. If that non-insignificant chunk of people who have gambling/alcohol/sex/drug addictions blow their entire income on the first day of the month on slots/booze/prostitutes/drugs, any funds you set aside for them means that what you have is UBI + existing welfare, not UBI instead of existing welfare. Are you willing to let people starve to death?

phatskat 2y ago
> Are you willing to let people starve to death? How is this any different from how things work now? “UBI”, to me, and in a society where work is largely a non-human task, needs to encompass housing, food, etc. In a world where jobs don’t exist in the way they do now, UBI needs to be a stop gap while we completely overhaul what it means to have an _economy_.
- lelanthran 2y ago
  >> > Are you willing to let people starve to death? > How is this any different from how things work now? Now there are specific (and often means-tested) welfare benefits available to people. Replacing all of those benefits with a single (non-means-tested) cash payment because: >>> Any sane UBI replaces most, if not all, other benefit programs. means you have to be ready to let other people die for your principles.
  - phatskat 2y ago
    I get what you mean, and I don’t think the two can’t coexist. Some benefits like SNAP would probably go away - what’s the difference in $500 for food vs the lump of UBI? If you’re getting $4k/month, then the need for those specific benefits goes away. If you’re disabled, UBI doesn’t need to replace your disability benefits, but could supplement it. Imagine having that $2k/month for disability on top of the $4k for UBI: people could actually focus that $2k on treatment instead of just using it to barely get by.
2y ago

Zanfa 2y ago

It replaces a small portion of benefit programs at best. Any sort of a serious disability and/or health related program will still need the same amount of resources to support people who need something other than money. And no UBI payment can cover market rates for these sorts of services.