|
|
|
|
|
by LatteLazy
2169 days ago
|
|
Because for those 18 months their lives would be different. I'd like to see a 5+ yr study specifically because that would allow people to give up low paying jobs, go get a full degree and then get a new better paying job. 18 months isn't that, obviously. But it would allow you to go and do something. Instead of going from being a waiter to a programmer, maybe you can go from being a waiter to a basic plumber or a truck driver or start a small business or something? We can all agree that having more cash will improve people health\community\whatever. The big question is what will people do with the opportunity no-strings-attached cash gives them. How many people will just spend the money? How many people will stop working and do nothing useful? How many people will stop working and do something very very useful? You only need a small proportion of people to make significant changes like this (and thus pay a lot more tax) and suddenly these programs get very affordable net. |
|
[1]actually you need an implausibly large proportion simply to offset the amount of people who already don't work and aren't entitled to benefit payments who would be eligible to receive UBI