2.2 trillion

anonymous asked:

what do you think of Universal Basic Income? I did the math, and for US, assuming UBI is roughly $25k - $30k, the end expenditure is something like $8.75b - $10.5b. I guessed at about 350 million people taking it, though; with 308.7 million people like it claims we have in the 2010 census (which I'll round to 310 for convenience), it comes out to $7.75b - $9.3b for all US citizens.

I thought universal basic income automatically covered all citizens over a certain age. Some proponents of the UBI say it’s a total of $13k instead of $25k-$30k (taking away $3,000 for health insurance) so it would be $10,000 which is 17% below the poverty level. 

If UBI covered everyone over the age of 21 (220,958,853 people as of 2010) that would be about 2,209,588,530,000 (2.2 trillion), more if we considered the increase of the population since then. That’s a huge chunk of the total budget and that’s really going to increase the percentage of our GDP. That’s also going to create a huge tax burden on ALL taxpayers assuming it doesn’t replace any current welfare program. So I’m against it in that sense.

A more productive way to go about this would be to replace the welfare state which costs us a total of 1 trillion (and pursuing incremental steps to avoid repeating the same mistakes). It should only cover those who make below a certain threshold like current programs of the welfare state would if we don’t want to drastically increase the costs of UBI. Adding on to that, a negative income tax also seems like a feasible option too, especially when you look at the history of wasteful government tax spending.