> A scheme that benefits all, such as uaranteed minimum income, will always face great resistance in the US, because enough US citizens are zero-sum thinkers. I

> A scheme that benefits all, such as uaranteed minimum income, will always face great resistance in the US, because enough US citizens are zero-sum thinkers. If it helps people we hate, it must be bad. I've only heard objections within the context of people being worried that giving money will reduce productivity and raise prices. > Because relative order within the social hierarchy is more important than absolute level of prosperity. It's more important to have someone below us than it is to do well. This is the "inequality" discussion. It's true that a lot of people are worried about relative order, and I agree that absolute prosperity is far more important, but I doubt those people are against UBI.