[bassman9000]

Reading the main site, or the Spanish one:

https://rentabasicaincondicional.eu/

Can't find a decent, detailed description of the proposal. They have an intro video, a translation of the same one in the main page:

https://rentabasicaincondicional.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/...

which is mostly gross oversimplifications, I suspect, to trigger emotional responses. Around 2:00 they mention funding. Basically, more and higher taxes, and the critical point, IMHO: replacing current subsidies and other public services with UBI. The devil is in the details, though, and wording is critical: they seem to say, but don't clearly state, that they're getting rid of everything else, and thus saving all that money to spend on UBI.

E.g. for countries with a public healthcare system: does UBI mean all public healthcare becomes private, and you spend UBI on your provider of choice? Does this mean people/enterprises no longer need to pay healthcare taxes?

E.g. for countries with unemployment insurance: does this mean it fully goes away, so people/enterprises no longer need to pay the unemployment tax?

E.g. what about pensions? Does UBI become your pension, thus no more taxes paid for your retirement? We all know what you need to live when you're 20 is a fraction of what you need at 70.

I'm extremely skeptical of any of these initiatives because they tend to be scarce in basic details. Which is likely done on purpose.

[xondono]

Agreed that it’s too scarce on details.

The obvious problem here is that UBI only makes sense if you take those other programs out (no public healthcare, no public pensions), but it will be unthinkable for most europeans to loose those. There’s no way to sell a change that requires people to take that amount of personal responsibility, especially when they’ve enjoyed life without them.

I also hate that what was a good economics idea has become into a meme, and has been modified in a way that defeats the purpose.

All the current talk about UBI started with people discussing back the concept of NIT (negative income tax), and the on-paper benefits of removing poverty traps from the system.

[hef19898]

UBI would replace a lot of existing social security programs, pensions and health care are jone of those candidates.

[bassman9000]

Read my comments, and the answers to yours: UBI is the a flat playment for everyone, but most existing social services have vastly different costs depending on many factors, including age.

The only way it would work was if UBI was calculated as the maximum payment needed by the most needy person. But then there would be no incentives to work for the vast majority of the population. No one producing is no one paying taxes, so no UBI.

[xondono]

That’s the “idea”, but there’s no way this would be the end result.

You’ll find the odd case of someone who instead of paying their health insurance decided to gamble their income or spent it on drugs. If UBI truly replaces public health, these people won’t have health services. There’s a snowballs chance in hell that you’ll be able to sell this politically in the EU.

[hef19898]

Again, that's not what UBI will be. It wil be a social program, health care being public in all EU countries will be apart. Also worth noting, you cannot be not insured in Europe. Drugs have nothing to do with that neither, all German drug addicts have health insurance.

[isbvhodnvemrwvn]

It can't really replace health care. The system works because people who don't need it as much (young people) pay for it. If they can choose not to, the entire system falls apart.