| >If UBI could be implemented in around the same cost as the welfare programs it replaces, it would have a net zero effect on inflation It cannot, unless you're ok with screwing those already on such programs. Do the math, and you'll find it is not even close. Welfare programs (unless you include SS) are given to a tiny amount of people - spreading that across a large group of people simply screws those who need it most. If you include SS, now again you're screwing old people who many times need the money to give it to people capable of work. >The downside of nearly all current forms of welfare (in the U.S.) is that they largely enforce the poverty gap. You get to a point where a small increase in pay causes a large decrease in benefits, and you become trapped unless you can get a large enough pay increase to jump the gap. This common claim is not true. There are ample people moving out of such program regularly, and many of them have limited lifetime benefits. >would UBI be the same cost as current welfare programs, No. I've been down this set of math lots of times. Do it - all welfare budgets are public, population is public, it's easy to estimate. |
You force corporations to pay, to not be able to avoid taxes - using a VAT that's customizable so things like diapers have say 0% tax vs. buying ads on Facebook has 80% tax. The nuanced ability to lever different goods and services allows tax to be fine-tuned to cover all costs until the floor quality of life is covered/existing for all.
We can supply everything 90%+ of what people need through automation, the remaining 10% or less will be the engineers and system and machine designers and maintainers - while the 90%+ can focus self-improvement/education, family/community and being creative/artistic etc.