Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
People barely holding onto existing housing needs to be part of the conversation, which is why UBI is on the board at all. Simply rotating homelessness would be detrimental.
There should be a way to identify the line between the cost of programs/crime/social constructs that deal with low income and the benefit of simply giving that to citizens with any threat of having to access those avenues of support.
The suggestion seems to be that line is $8000/year where government money spent/saved is a wash. (yes I understand that this is for people already on the street and accessing public housing and food resources, but the previous arrival at $20 000/year as being too expensive and effectively shutting down the conversation shouldn't be happening)
|
For sure, right now even welfare’s amount have steep claw backs and need to requalify once you are out of the program. Certainly one of the benefits of UBI is the lack of a need to qualify and the claw backs are just a function of the tax system
