• Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I’m fine with it but feel it needs to slowly decrease as income goes up. To be clear this cannot have cut off cliffs and should err on the side of recipient. Bit there is no reason to give it to anyone with high income.

    If you give it to us, we’ll invest it which will fuck with the market or spend it on luxury goods. This all cause inflation that would negate the benefits.

    Anyone who really needs it and is spending it all within some reasonable time doesn’t have this inflation effect.

    Same way people on food stamps don’t cause the price of food to go up because they’re not using it for excessive spending.

    I understand part of the goal is no bureaucracy so I suggest it be part of the tax system. Everyone get it’s but it’s taxed away for high income earners in a way that is not tax avoidable.

    I could also see it being added to the us tax system by simply expanding the child tax credit to include adults. That already has limits built in but that’s a lump sum on a tax return so not an ideal distribution.

    • HatchetHaro@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      The thing with UBI is that that budget has to come from taxes anyways, and high income people would (should) naturally pay more in taxes compared to those with lower income, even if they’re taxed at the same percentage (which they shouldn’t).

      Since they’re already paying more in taxes, UBI itself no longer needs to scale inversely with income.