I’ll take this opportunity to detail my UBI system, not that I endorse UBI, but if it is implemented, this is how I’d like to see it.
Before implementing UBI, change the tax code to not tax wages more than investments, and see how far that gets us.
UBI exists for all ages, but the amount may vary by age. Like SredniVashtar said, we’ll need to think about how it meshes with other entitlement programs.
Children’s UBI is remitted to the parents, with the appropriate split if they’re divorced.
Within a certain age range (say, 6 to 66), UBI is contingent upon being engaged in an “approved” activity such as working (and paying taxes), being enrolled in an accredited educational program, caregiver status, etc.
All schools are private. Parents can decide whether to do the minimum to check the box or integrate school with daycare, extracurriculars, etc. based on their own priorities.
UBI does not vary based on household size. Smaller households are inherently inefficient, so if you can’t afford to live alone, get some roommates.
UBI does not vary by location. If you’re in a high-COL area and UBI isn’t enough to live off, move.
I don’t think we’re at the point where healthcare is a trivial societal cost like food yet. So that’s probably not a problem for UBI to solve, it’ll actually be a subsidy, which people may or may not want to do.
a small room, with a bed, a light, a small amount of space to keep stuff, and a lock on the door.
access to as much “people chow”, bland but nutritionally balanced food, as they want.
access to fresh water to drink, and access to shared toilets, sinks, and showers.
access to public libraries with shared computers and internet, as well as books and reference materials.
access to public parks
access to medical clinics for basic healthcare. I’d certainly include vaccinations, antibiotics, setting bones and the like. In my utopia, I’d include most healthcare, honestly, but that’s still expensive, so I think we’d need some limits.
access to basic education
basic garments that allow you to get to those parks, libraries, and medical centers.
And if housing can’t be built in central enough locations that people can walk to the other stuff, some basic bus service. Children get a room with less space and a smaller bed within a short walk of their parent(s).
If you want anything else – a TV, nicer clothing, better food, access to video games in your room, coffee, other recreational drugs, a room large enough for a queen-sized bed, a single-family dwelling for you and your romantic partner and your children – you work for it. That work might be for money, or it might just be making yourself useful enough to other people that they gave you stuff.
Yes, there would be people who choose not to work. And there are a lot of people who have disabilities, and can’t really do enough work to earn their keep. But I believe that enough people would choose to work enough to keep the lights on, and the human-chow flowing. And to make art, and make nice clothes and nice food and nice haircuts for those who can buy them.
So if someone works and earns enough that he can afford more than a single, small room, does he simply live somewhere else and forego his entitlement to the communal living?
Some geographic areas will be in more demand than others. How do you decide who gets the in-demand housing? Lottery system? Charge rent? Based on family history?
Plenty of room in the deserts around here. It is my solution to homelessness: make towns in the desert that people can live in. Shit, there might already be towns in the deserts that people don’t live in.
Yup. Also, plenty of Wyoming and Montana, and all the way down to New Mexico. Most of Texas, though not sure if the homeless want to live in that fascist state.
Yes. you either take it or you don’t. Food is separable – you can mostly eat people-chow but splurge on a chocolate cake, or mostly eat food you buy but pick up a bag of chow on the way home to make ends meet. But housing kinda isn’t.
Oh, I would, too. Actually, I’d probably enter the lottery in several high-demand cities, each in a different state, while maintaining my true residence elsewhere, until I eventually won one, then I’d use it as a vacation home. This is assuming communication among government agencies is going nowhere fast.
My point is, I don’t like “cliffs” in the system. You can occupy a unit that’s worth (say) $700/month for free, or you can rent a nicer place for $1200, but you can’t do something in-between for $600. This seems like a strike against gig workers who would be happy to spend $600 but don’t want to do 40 hours a week of donkey work to afford the $1200. Like Lucy said, though, these people would at least have other options for spending.
Canadian welfare programs do not use food stamps on the grounds, rightly or wrongly, that they are inefficient and degrading. However this approach comes up in discussions occasionally.
What do Americans feel about food stamps as a delivery mechanism?