Universal Based Income

To point (5) and agreeing with point (1) I addressed this in my original post. The only way it could work is through a VAT and increased efficiency of government spending. Just increasing taxes willy-nilly will not do - the math does not pencil out.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that we need to make our federal government more efficient. The problem is we already have a $1 trillion budget deficit, and an enormous national debt. We need to reduce military spending and reform social security & healthcare just to get back to the baseline of a balanced budget. So this funding won't be available to go towards UBI. It would have to be funded exclusively through a VAT and other forms of taxation designed to redistribute wealth.

If the primary purpose of a UBI is redistribution of wealth, why not just increase taxes on the upper quintiles and redistribute the revenue directly to the lower quintiles? It feels like politicians are trying to implement socialism without actually calling it that in hopes that people won't notice.
 
Who is rich?

So far as I can tell, the definition is almost always "anyone with more than me." The higher income brackets already pay disproportionate amount of the total tax burden (relative to share of income) - which is to be expected, but there are limits to how far this can be pushed.
I saw an interesting poll once in regards to healthcare. People were asked if they supported "free" healthcare, and the vast majority said yes. But then they were asked if they would support "free" healthcare if it meant their taxes would go up to pay for it, and the vast majority said no. The takeaway from this poll is simple. The vast majority of people support the idea of redistribution of wealth as long as it isn't their own wealth that's being redistributed.

As you said, redistribution of wealth already exists. It's a necessary evil in a progressive society. But we need to be careful not to go too far or we could do more harm than good.
 
I saw an interesting poll once in regards to healthcare. People were asked if they supported "free" healthcare, and the vast majority said yes. But then they were asked if they would support "free" healthcare if it meant their taxes would go up to pay for it, and the vast majority said no. The takeaway from this poll is simple. The vast majority of people support the idea of redistribution of wealth as long as it isn't their own wealth that's being redistributed.

As you said, redistribution of wealth already exists. It's a necessary evil in a progressive society. But we need to be careful not to go too far or we could do more harm than good.

The answer to this question depends somewhat on the country you're polling in. Americans are trained to think in a certain way from childhood which means they have certain preferences.

Of course, holding others to higher standards than oneself is a universal phenomena.
 
My professor wants us to write a few pages on this topic.

anyone have any opinions on UBI?

I honestly don’t like any socialist ideas especially giving out a “free lunch” such as giving everyone $1,000/monthly.

thoughts?

It's not a socialist idea. It's a stupid idea. It's failed over and over again. Of course, we all know that history repeats itself, but do you want to repeat it on your dime?
If I were in your shoes, I'd write an essay based on the economic numbers simply because human outcomes will always vary and be interpreted differently. But overall, we know from tests run around the globe, even in a small town in California, that the idea is a loser.

And you know what you could use as a model? Testing trading strategies. It's all about the numbers. A winner is a winner and a loser is a loser. No one is going to change that.

You approach the battle based on the numbers and you won't go wrong. But perhaps your professor, if he/she is a liberal, will take offense at the numbers. But that's okay. Just remind the professor that the United States used to be a free country. Now, not so sure.

Here's an article to start your research.
When in doubt, do the math. You won't go wrong.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/milton...e-a-thoroughly-wrongheaded-idea/#13d8d60945e1
 
For the record, I'm still torn on UBI but as you'll see below I can see the benefits.

---

Socialist? I don't think it's very socialist in the context it is in. $1,000 is hardly enough to buy anything but possibly enough to make the difference between not being able to live and being able to live. If you define "socialism" as "anything where you use some tax dollars to help people" I guess your definition is vague enough that we should probably get rid of the VA as well. Veterans are a huge drain on tax dollars with all the benefits we promise them for free yet no one screaming socialism seems to bat an eye when we offer them cheap housing, loans, free school, or anything else. If we're going to hate socialism we need to be consistent! We should therefore also stop giving tax dollars to churches, defund public schools, and defund public services! All of these are forms of "wealth redistribution" yet everyone on both sides of the aisle seems to support them - so perhaps we can let go of the "socialist demon" and accept we aren't stepping into marxist communism by helping people out with some tax money.

Assuming that you support and use public services you've already invalidated the crux of your feeling with some cognitive dissonance. So let's step back and take the concept of minimum wage. Currently, there is no state where minimum wage allows you to afford a 2 bedroom apartment. You might rightfully say "but that's too luxurious a one bedroom is fine!". To that I'd say you're wrong. Assuming your "total labor ability" amounts to some minimum wage job this would mean you couldn't afford to start a family. That's a hit on birth rates considering around 1.7 million people are minimum wage workers. By supplying them a UBI it could allow these people to produce more for longer.

Consider too the working poor. These people do not fit into the normal bin of "lazy good for nothing leeches" that the alleged "anti-socialists" use as a reason to not help your fellow citizen. For these people, the UBI could dramatically improve their lives. $1000 could be the difference between making rent and utilities and not. Come to think of it, welfare and housing assistance is sort of a UBI but is easily abused. What if we got rid of welfare and housing assistance and just issued a blanket UBI? We could increase the prosperity of the nation.

Finally, consider the strength of a nation. A nation is built by strong people, and strong people are not raised with the boot of poverty on their neck. Is anyone trying to get rich? No. In my opinion no UBI should afford anyone the ability to get rich. However, with the effect of globalization and wage stagnation a simple way to raise profits is to just not pay your workers enough. While the trend in income on capital gains earners has increased, there has been no such increase for your average Joe. Shouldn't we be looking out for the average Joe instead of the people that can afford to make a lot of money through capital gains? If our goal is to build a strong nation we first must look after our people.

So where do we get the money? Well for starters we can cut back on military spending and federal spending by getting rid of the use-it-or-lose-it budget policy. This could really clean up some spending and improve the overall quality of federal projects. A VAT-type tax could be a useful way to collect additional spend to create such a program without stifling success or wealth (this would directly address the problem of the ultra-wealthy business owner avoiding tax liability). We could even marginally increase short term capital gains tax for the highest earners and at the worst case an inheritance tax on estates of more than say $50 million. We'd need a hefty triple-digit billion to single digit trillion in taxes to make it work. We can collect most of it by improving the efficiency of our government spending. The average tax payer (the only one that matters) probably won't even feel it.

But what about refugees and illegal immigrants? Make the UBI only available to American-born citizens. That was simple.

We need to move away from this idea that we're all just temporarily embarrassed millionaires and accept that for most of us our lives will be average at best. As such, we should be voting for our, and our fellow citizen's, best interests. This would be one of them. Remember the French Revolution. The further we stray from keeping people able to be alive (DO NOT confuse this with "income equality" - I mean literally keeping them housed and fed), the closer we get to really, really bad times.
Cut on military spending? You surely don't want to cut on security spending for your car or house. But sure, poor nation does not need any "military spending".
 
Last edited:
You can cut your military spending all you want but you will not have the leverage when dealing with Iran, ISIS, China, Russia.

Small countries might not need them because NATO/USA is protecting them and nobody really is going to attack them. But America, i can tell you a few countries that are waiting to pounce.
 
Who is rich?

So far as I can tell, the definition is almost always "anyone with more than me." The higher income brackets already pay disproportionate amount of the total tax burden (relative to share of income) - which is to be expected, but there are limits to how far this can be pushed.

I have no definitive answer for that. But anything above a million a year is considered rich?
Maybe a few percentages more than the lower brackets? 5% more maybe?
10 million and above 8% more maybe? and so on.
 
Back
Top