3 ms·
Any time a UBI is mentioned I think it is important to point out that the program is traditionally paired with (and funded exclusively by) a Land Value Tax. Th
by ende 11y ago
Any time a UBI is mentioned I think it is important to point out that the program is traditionally paired with (and funded exclusively by) a Land Value Tax. This is an important point because the UBI is not an income redistribution mechanism, but rather it is a mechanism for paying out to society the rent paid to society for the right to own land and enjoy the provlidge of property rights institutionalizing the concept of land ownership. This is akin to the citizens's dividend paid out from state oil revenues in Alaska.
For more information on the reasoning behind these ideas, see the works of Henry George and Thomas Paine.
- jedmeyers 11y agoWill the instituted Land Value/Natural Resources dividends be enough to provide everyone with the UBI sufficient to make a living? I am just looking for the basic napkin calculations here.
- ende 11y agoGood question. The stated goal (generalizing of course) of the LVT is to replace most other forms of taxation, particularly income tax. I've seen napkin calculations where that's possible, but the other side of the question of course is the payout. Most 'realistic' estimates I've personally seen of that don't necessarily assume that a UBI will provide above a very basic living. There's usually the intention of incentivizing additional income, but the UBI at least provides the security to be selective in the job market or promote risk taking in ventures. By the way, it's also apparently commonly held among economists that the LVT is a very efficient tax with low evasion. The difficulty in implementation has historically been considered to be land valuation itself, but recent advances in things like GIS apparently make high resolution valuation feasible.