UBI is back in the news, which means confused takes about UBI are back in the news. I said most of what I have to say in this thread:https://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/737895094460780544 …
-
Show this thread
-
St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻 Retweeted St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻
But want to emphasize something that's poorly communicated by UBI boosters: you can't get the price tag by multiplying (benefit x population). That's disingenuous.https://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/737895292205420546 …
St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻 added,
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
We need to reckon with the welfare trap problem. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap …) It's very difficult for people dependent on benefits to improve their situation, because they lose benefits as their income increases. This can create effective marginal tax rates of 90% or more!
3 replies 9 retweets 29 likesShow this thread -
The point of UBI isn't to give everyone magical freebucks. It's forced by basic mathematics: making the low end of the income curve less perverse and abusive. This means _lowering_ the average benefit, but removing the strings that trap people at the same time.
5 replies 1 retweet 20 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @St_Rev
there is also the advantage that I harp on, every time the topic comes up: "we should do it not to help the poor, but to punish the social workers" (tongue in cheek - helping the poor is good too)
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable
That's a fair objection and one I don't have a good answer to. Ideally you'd have a magical check printer in Fort Knox that does some fixed % of GNP and can't be altered by human intervention. Barring that, I dunno.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.