[RoyalHenOil]

I oppose UBI for unrelated reasons: giving everyone money (if it is actually a life-changing amount of money) is unaffordable. It's hugely wasteful to give money to wealthy people.

Instead, I would prefer a system where people receive payments relative to income, like a reverse tax system. This way, people in higher income brackets pay in (in the form of taxes) and people in lower income brackets get a pay out.

This is far more affordable than UBI, meaning we can actually do it, and also puts money where it is most needed.

[cbeach]

That kind of taxation would just reduce upward mobility in the workplace though, wouldn’t it?

I wouldn’t accept a job role with more responsibility if it meant losing my low-income subsidies and being taxed instead.

Society needs workers to accept more responsibilities and progress in their careers otherwise there will be less creation of jobs for those at the entry level.

I’m not saying UBI is the right solution, but it would reduce the “cliffs” where people lose money for progressing in their careers.

[balfirevic]

Those two system are the same - or rather - can be the same depending on how you tweak the parameters.

Wealthy people will pay much more in taxes than what they receive in UBI and you can make this system have the exact same distribution of money as the negative income tax system.