250 care leavers is hardly any kind of sample needed to make a reasonable study of *universal* basic income
We will still need to convince a lot of people that we do not need to slave away for 40+ hours a week to be entitled to the basics in life. The media has done a good job of painting the unemployed and poor as lazy and feckless people who are trying to scam the system, not victims of circumstance who would do anything to not be poor. They have also painted millennials as lazy for realising that capitalism is getting us nowhere and nothing in return for making other people richer. Part of fixing our broken economy is making people realise there is more to life than the economy.
UBI usually gets killed politically because it is too easy for a campaign group to spam the “why are you giving welfare to the rich” argument. Before you’ve even had a chance to type “Because ” in whatever argument you want to make, it’s already been reposted and retweeted 3,000 times and you won’t keep up. By the time you’ve looked up from trying to reply to all those posts, there’s a bean-counter behind you telling you how much can be saved by means-testing the benefit you’re looking to introduce.
I would prefer negative tax to be introduced first and then UBI later down tbe line
4 comments
It pissing isn’t.
250 care leavers is hardly any kind of sample needed to make a reasonable study of *universal* basic income
We will still need to convince a lot of people that we do not need to slave away for 40+ hours a week to be entitled to the basics in life. The media has done a good job of painting the unemployed and poor as lazy and feckless people who are trying to scam the system, not victims of circumstance who would do anything to not be poor. They have also painted millennials as lazy for realising that capitalism is getting us nowhere and nothing in return for making other people richer. Part of fixing our broken economy is making people realise there is more to life than the economy.
UBI usually gets killed politically because it is too easy for a campaign group to spam the “why are you giving welfare to the rich” argument. Before you’ve even had a chance to type “Because ” in whatever argument you want to make, it’s already been reposted and retweeted 3,000 times and you won’t keep up. By the time you’ve looked up from trying to reply to all those posts, there’s a bean-counter behind you telling you how much can be saved by means-testing the benefit you’re looking to introduce.
I would prefer negative tax to be introduced first and then UBI later down tbe line