I agree that the "universal" aspect looks weird. But structuring it that way makes various models or calculations really simple. In practice, the tax code would presumably be progressive, so higher income individuals would still be paying, not receiving, on net.
One possible problem with UBI that I rarely see mentioned is that, unlike Friedman’s negative income tax, it would presumably apply to all citizens (hence “universal”); surely someone like Elon Musk doesn’t need more subsidies than he already gets.
Great article. The main point that you raised is particularly salient: government programs almost always grow. The corollary is also true - government programs are rarely eliminated/reduced. Proposals to implement UBI carry a 95% risk that UBI will be on top of other programs, and the planned reductions will not happen.
I agree that the "universal" aspect looks weird. But structuring it that way makes various models or calculations really simple. In practice, the tax code would presumably be progressive, so higher income individuals would still be paying, not receiving, on net.
One possible problem with UBI that I rarely see mentioned is that, unlike Friedman’s negative income tax, it would presumably apply to all citizens (hence “universal”); surely someone like Elon Musk doesn’t need more subsidies than he already gets.
Great article. The main point that you raised is particularly salient: government programs almost always grow. The corollary is also true - government programs are rarely eliminated/reduced. Proposals to implement UBI carry a 95% risk that UBI will be on top of other programs, and the planned reductions will not happen.