A Universal Basic Income program is social security program where all citizens of a country receive a regular, unconditional sum of money from the government. The funding for Universal Basic Income comes from taxation and government owned entities including income from endowments, real estate and natural resources. Several countries, including Finland, India and Brazil, have experimented with a UBI system but have not implemented a permanent program. The longest running UBI system in the world is the Alaska Permanent Fund in the U.S. state of Alaska. In the Alaska Permanent Fund each indivi…
Read more@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No
@9L7JQ9T3wks3W
Food is (and legally should be) a human right, and many would be unable to afford food without a UBI.
@9KXV2KP 1mo1MO
UBI would cost 3.8 trillion dollars in the USA every year. Putting this on top of the already 34 trillion dollar debt.
every person deserves to live with the necessities so the least you can provide is income to house and feed themselves
@9FLDK637mos7MO
with a guaranteed basic income people who live in poverty because they were not able to afford a place to live would be able to get a job and save up to get a place to live. Adding onto that thought people are struggling now in multiple states because the price of housing has significantly increased and our pay has not. our food prices hace also increased.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Yes
@9FSM4GJ7mos7MO
The average cost of living right now in the United States is $2500-$3500 per month, the poverty increase rate has gone up by %4 in just two years. Universal Basic Income will provide that safety net if monthly income does not suffice the cost of living.
@9K66N8HIndependent 2mos2MO
With a Universal Basic Income would give the people more of an incentive to work, reduce poverty, reduce the wage gap, as well as declining the amount of income discrimination.
@9HR9QY34mos4MO
We already have so many gov. programs, why not sum them into one. have basic income & allow people to act for themselves.
@9GDY35L6mos6MO
Finland ran a universal income study between the years 2017-2018 by giving 2000 unemployed people a universal income of around 560 euros a month. Compared to another group of around 178,000 people on unemployment benefits the 2000 unemployed worked an average of six more days than the others.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Yes, everyone should receive an income to cover basic necessities including food and housing
@7FDN267 5mos5MO
Those who are able and refuse to work actively limit the ability of the Government to provide financial assistance to those who actually need it.
@Name-IrrelevantConstitution 5mos5MO
Those depending on welfare are already being manipulated every election season. "Vote for me or the other guy will take your benefits away." We don't need an entire society at the mercy of the state, who can threaten to take that income away whenever we step out of line.
@9GTNTG8Republican5mos5MO
I believe that many people in the united states take advantage of financial aid. I do believe in some instances that financial aid is useful, but since so many people take advantage of it then I believe it needs to be limited. it is not fair for people to choose not to work and live off of financial aid.
@9G4GJQV6mos6MO
Universal basic income is unjust, for it is helping some but placing the burdens on others, it is not fair for one to pay for another without the consent of the payer.
@9GN56PS 6mos6MO
We all start at $0 currently in this world. But if we started at the living wage, we wouldn’t have to worry about how we can eat, live, or survive. It’s like a Chuck E-Cheez, give people tokens to participate and you will see an explosion in involvement and innovation of new businesses that benefit us all rather than financial struggle.
@9GTLTYR5mos5MO
There is no such thing as a free lunch. A tax break for one generation guarantees a tax hike for future generations. Decrease economic output. People respond to incentives.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No, this will encourage people not to work and harm economic growth
@7FDN267 5mos5MO
As with everything in physics, humans tend toward the lowest energy state. With this in mind, lazy people who do not have to work will choose not to.
@9GT472M5mos5MO
Not everyone that is unemployed is 'lazy'. Many unemployed people may have physical or mental disabilities that keep them from being able to work. A Universal Basic Income will help people who are in bad situations survive. If a person is just 'lazy' a Universal Basic Income will only help them a little, they will most likely get a job anyway to help support themselves further.
@9GS2H7Z5mos5MO
EVERY SINGLE STUDY shows that work attendance does not decrease, people are less depressed and less anxious and they are happier and less stress because they don't have to worry about being able to pay for rent or putting food on the table.
@9FSM4GJ7mos7MO
Having a Universal Basic Income will not encourage people not the work, but will rather provide them with a safety net. Universal Basic Income will not cover the whole cost of living, as the economy and cost of living is on an increase, so either way you could not live off a Universal Basic Income, but rather give everyone a place to start.
@9FPZVRB7mos7MO
It will help people to survive but it won't encourage people not to work if amount of paid money will be low enough.
@8HCHSRR4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if the home meets certain requirements.
@8LJM2HB3yrs3Y
Yes, for all minors, elders (65+), pregnant women, new mothers, people with physical or mental issues, and students until they make a livable wage where they can support themselves.
Deleted10mos10MO
Yes, but only in the form of a social dividend under a market socialist economy
@8SH3RLG3yrs3Y
No, because it gives the government control
@button_down_royalty_ 1yr1Y
This is true and a concern for me. However I think the people should be given plenty of say as they are the ones who need it. I have some (in serious need of work) ideas though.
@93YMVXF2yrs2Y
Yes, but as a welfare replacement.
@9G9C49K6mos6MO
Yes, but institute it gradually to prevent mass disruption, starting with state-based pilot programs such as Alaska’s. It should eventually replace our current welfare system
@9DZ3S5N8mos8MO
No, have a National Job Program instead
@9JRHG442mos2MO
No, on the basis that housing, medicine, and basic necessities should not be privatized or priced according to government. Instead we should socialize these necessities as making money on things necessary for life in immoral.
@9GDMX4S6mos6MO
Yes, but institute it gradually to prevent mass disruption, perhaps a few state-based pilot programs such as Alaska’s. Eventually, it should replace our current welfare system.
@8M7PYD53yrs3Y
Yes but only for low income individuals
@9GMYJS46mos6MO
it is good for the people who need help off their feet mut for lazy people they will just not want to work
@8HHWP4P4yrs4Y
@9BZYMHF11mos11MO
No, have a job guarantee instead
@8ZC5YXC2yrs2Y
Yes, but not at the expense of other social programs
@8WRH3JS2yrs2Y
Yes, but only for a limited amount of time.
@95SQ42D2yrs2Y
We should for people who are incapable of working
@9D6QJCZ8mos8MO
I feel as though if there were a universal income program, the people who use their money for stuff to not help them physically and mentally, could somewhat destabilize the economy.
That's a valid concern. For instance, if a significant number of people were to use their basic income to fuel unhealthy habits, like substance abuse, it might increase public health costs, which could indirectly affect the economy. However, isn't it also possible that with financial stability, people might make better choices, leading to positive societal changes? What are your thoughts on this?
@8SRK2LK3yrs3Y
Yes, if that person cannot afford basic living supplies and actually attempts to get a job
No. A universal basic income will never cover enough of the costs in order to genuinely facilitate someone's quality of life. We should instead improve social programs.
@8XH3R3D2yrs2Y
I believe that we shouldn’t necessarily give out the money but rather provide opportunities for them to get on their feet financially and provide them with stable job opportunities.
@9L74FFC3wks3W
Yes, but institute it gradually over a set period to avoid mass disruption. Start with a state-based pilot program like Alaska’s. It should eventually replace our current welfare system
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
