Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
In the libertarian version of UBI you don’t care and let the person die. You have met the requirement of equality of opportunity.
In the left version all of those programs (or many) would remain and it would only be the retirement benefits and welfare benefits and associated tax breaks that would disappear. In the US universal heath care and improving public education are likely better targets Then UBI in the short term for universal programs that improve standards of living
It certainly makes funding more challenging. In the US given that government is a smaller portion of GDP then most other developed countries they have the tax room to cover the cost in addition to existing programs.
|
Great comments. But what is the possibility of USGov approving the type of taxation required to support this program. We're talking 254M adults in the US. At $1,000 a month that is $3.048 TRILLION dollars in revenue to be collected and redistributed each year. If we go with the $20,000 a year model, that's $5.08 TRILLION. That's 1/4 of projected GDP for 2020. Where do you find the political support for such a program and such a heavy lift?
The other end of this is, that would mean the end to every social program in the country, including social security and medicare. I'm all for supporting the needy, but I will tell you one thing, I'm not going into retirement and taking a $15K a year haircut on my social security, and have to belly up for healthcare benefits on top of that, to support such a plan. I've worked my whole life and paid my taxes and contributions to social security with the expectation of a payoff in my golden years. That needs to happen. Unless that happens, even the most liberal of Americans will kill this thing in the womb.