[piva00]

RSA is not UBI, UBI literally means Universal Basic Income, it's not for no income/low income people, it's universal.

You are conflating the concept of UBI with social welfare, they are different things and it's a bit annoying to see the erosion of the UBI concept into social welfare, I've noticed an uptick of this the past year or so, no idea where it's originating from...

[pixel_popping]

Agreed I butchered it, but what is the concrete difference right now for someone that has no job (so where UBI is relevant) with social welfare and "UBI" if in the end, that person gets a monthly income that is somehow guaranteed?

[RugnirViking]

they don't have to spend that life jumping through hoops, visiting particular offices at particular times to talk to people who don't want to be there, documenting medical histories, job searches, going through embarassing questioning, repeated monthly or more, all to potentially be denied the money they need for rent and what meagre food they can afford though some unexpected bureaucracy failure, imagined or real.

UBI being given to everyone (and therefore requiring little more than a confirmed identity) IS the feature.

As for whether its feasible and what it would do to society in terms of people's job motivation, I don't know. But the idea is to reduce the degrading experience of welfare as it currently exists, as well as reducing the surprisingly high expense of the government offices dedicated to checking and enforcing the byzantine laws surrounding the current system.

[tardedmeme]

The concrete difference is simple: you don't have to spend most of your life convincing the government that you deserve to continue getting money. If you've ever interacted with a welfare system, you'll know. They work much better on paper than in real life.

[piva00]

The concrete difference is that the society around the person living in a UBI-society will be very different than one where there's only social welfare.