Let’s jump straight to the obvious problem—such a program is absurdly expensive. Chugging the basic numbers: $12k per person, with roughly 330 million Americans, is $3.96 trillion per year. The federal budget is currently $6.1 trillion per year. So a UBI would immediately increase the entire federal budget by ~40%.
I find this a misleading framing. Here’s a trivial form of UBI: raise everyone’s taxes by $12k/year, then give everyone a $12k UBI. That’s entirely revenue-neutral. It’s guaranteed that everyone can afford the extra taxes, by putting their UBI toward it if nothing else.
Now, the whole idea underlying UBI is that it’s redistributive, so we would presumably want to shift that plan toward wealthier people paying more additional taxes, and poorer people paying fewer. But we can do that in a way that maintains revenue-neutrality throughout. We can also consider taking some of the money from existing social safety net programs, as you suggest above. And we can consider raising taxes overall in the interest of greater redistribution, but it’s not a necessary feature.
Am I missing something here in your view? I’m open to the idea that I’m missing some obvious aspect, because I’ve heard so many people make claims like this, and I find that confusing enough that it’s plausible I’m overlooking something! If I am, I’d love to understand what it is.
I find this a misleading framing. Here’s a trivial form of UBI: raise everyone’s taxes by $12k/year, then give everyone a $12k UBI. That’s entirely revenue-neutral. It’s guaranteed that everyone can afford the extra taxes, by putting their UBI toward it if nothing else.
Now, the whole idea underlying UBI is that it’s redistributive, so we would presumably want to shift that plan toward wealthier people paying more additional taxes, and poorer people paying fewer. But we can do that in a way that maintains revenue-neutrality throughout. We can also consider taking some of the money from existing social safety net programs, as you suggest above. And we can consider raising taxes overall in the interest of greater redistribution, but it’s not a necessary feature.
Am I missing something here in your view? I’m open to the idea that I’m missing some obvious aspect, because I’ve heard so many people make claims like this, and I find that confusing enough that it’s plausible I’m overlooking something! If I am, I’d love to understand what it is.