I mean, let’s not stop there. Our DOD could cut back, go after high income tax cheats and dodgers. There is a list for sure. FYI, Alaska has had Basic Income for awhile now. They call it something else and it fluctuates, but that’s generally what it is.
This is a fantastic article and incredibly interesting:
Last October, more than 800 people were enrolled in the basic-income plan, but they didn’t all receive the same stipend. There are three groups: One receives $1,000 a month for a year; another receives $6,500 up front and then $500 a month from there; and another gets just $50 a month.
While cautioning that this was only an interim six-month follow-up for what is a yearlong program, the researchers nonetheless found stark and encouraging changes in participants’ material conditions. Those who received $500 a month or more had seen the biggest gains. At the start, fewer than 10% said they were living in their own home or apartment, while at the six-month point, more than a third said they lived in their own housing.
Edit: The results make me think of all of these programs that are trying to get people out of homelessness should cut way back and just do a basic income with that money (with life help classes and guidance of course).
This isn’t directed at you, this is for the other dude, but also answers your question a little. The entire US was given checks during the pandemic, did it make you lazy?
You’re going to have to source that. There is no cycle of dependency, lol. Everyone making it above survival level probably won’t even spur them to vote. These aren’t people rolling in money, it’s 12k per year.
Because you were rolling in checks or because it was unhealthy to do so? Having worked full-time and part time as a freelancer, job burnout and needing recovery isn’t laziness.
Are you reading a different article or do you have different sourced information? They were the most vulnerable and a lot of them living on the streets.
That’s the premise of a social experiment in Denver, where for the past few months several hundred of the city’s most vulnerable people have been given cash with no strings attached.
Edit: grabbed the wrong quote:
At the start, fewer than 10% said they were living in their own home or apartment, while at the six-month point, more than a third said they lived in their own housing.
What you wanted to do and what you did are 2 different things. You’re overworked and probably not doing a job that you want to do. That isn’t laziness, that’s job unsatisfaction.
You would have to start at the most vulnerable. Then eventually, you would have to target the adults who make 70k or less which is about 70% of the adult population. Then, taper it down up to 100k. This would be app. 2 trillion. I think what a lot of people are missing is, we may not have a choice to not have some kind of UBI with robots taking over quite a few jobs in the next 50 years. We have to get corporations and billionaires to pay more taxes as well. The bottom 80% are paying most of the taxes. Don’t forget that trump paid $0-$700 in taxes for quite a few years and I’m sure that’s more common than not.
The benefits of UBI would be:
More people living in rural areas because they don’t have to go to the city to get jobs. They could work in a grocery store and live a decent life.
Have the opportunity to develop new businesses.
More people going to school because they could afford it.
More money being spent and more taxes received from that.
Right now, our money is being funneled up to the rich shareholders of these huge companies instead of going to Americans who aren’t even getting by.
Denver experimented with giving people $1,000 a month. It reduced homelessness and increased full-time employment, a study found. (www.businessinsider.com)
cross-posted from: lemmit.online/post/1021018...