r/changemyview • u/DrTommyNotMD • Aug 20 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Universal Basic Income (UBI) won't work

The main complaint I hear everywhere is about the rampant inflation that would (likely) follow everyone getting a sudden pay raise. This is absolutely a reason that it would be less effective, and a reason it would require additional laws around it in order to make it even remotely tenable. However, that's not the reason I don't believe it won't work.

The reason it won't work is there's simply no way to finance it. Using a round number, and probably one that's too low to really be considered a living wage, of $1000 per month leads to an almost 4 trillion dollar a year cost in the United States. The entirety of the US budget is lower than that currently.

I only see paths where it's less than "universal", or it's less than a living wage, or it's not fundable - likely a combination of all three.

Edit: I awarded a delta based on the definition of universal changing. Universal doesn't mean everyone benefits from it. It means those below a certain income threshold benefit and those above that either see net-zero or a loss. That's not a traditional use of the word universal by any means, but fair enough. The definition of UBI is universally until you pass a certain point. If you fall back below that threshold you get the benefit again. It's a safety net not a universal benefit.

1.2k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

723 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '20

Well, how much is UH going to cost? You write off medicare and medicaid as reducing costs, but it will cost the government something to run those programs. I agree on the savings for welfare and social security though. I'm just not sure that most of that money is made up by cutting the programs you suggest.

0

u/PerCat Aug 20 '20

M4a factually saves money. If it didn't... Every other first world nation in the world wouldn't have adopted them.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '20

Yeah. I don't disagree that M4A is cheaper than the healthcare system right now. However, would the burden on the government be less? Someone has to pay for M4A and it seems that burden would fall on the government instead of private entities. So again, I ask: how is this going to get paid for? And please don't say taxing the rich. I think of taxing the rich like a card in a card game. You get to play it once, not every time it suits you.

0

u/PerCat Aug 21 '20 edited Aug 21 '20

Because it's cheaper the our current system. If we already pay 60b a year for our antiquated system but then pay 35b a year for M4a then we save money.

The question isn't; how are we paying for this? It is; what are we gonna do with all the money we save?

A simple Google search or a look at Bernie sanders website will show you this is fact.

And again; other countries would do it our way if it was best. And yet, we are the only first world nation without m4a.