A Universal Basic Income program is social security program where all citizens of a country receive a regular, unconditional sum of money from the government. The funding for Universal Basic Income comes from taxation and government owned entities including income from endowments, real estate and natural resources. Several countries, including Finland, India and Brazil, have experimented with a UBI system but have not implemented a permanent program. The longest running UBI system in the world is the Alaska Permanent Fund in the U.S. state of Alaska. In the Alaska Permanent Fund each individual and family receives a monthly sum that is funded by dividends from the state’s oil revenues. Proponents of UBI argue that it will reduce or eliminate poverty by providing everyone with a basic income to cover housing and food. Opponents argue that a UBI would be detrimental to economies by encouraging people to either work less or drop out of the workforce entirely.
I think programs to cover basic necessities should be given under a strict review process to avoid missing individuals in great need and prevent individuals who do not need it from abusing the system so that it will not cause an increase in taxes.
I would support it if it really help the matginizes people or low resources demographic but as we can see thodmse money used for other things that are not what made for. I am rather neutral here but people can afford and be responsible with their money.
Yes, this would make private education more affordable and lead to more jobs. A UBI should cover food and water, and we’ll fund that UBI by cutting 628 Billion dollars of Military funding as well as 31Billion dollars coming out of cutting the department of agriculture, homeland security, border security, the war on drugs, nuclear weapon development, ICE, FBI, TSA, and NSA. That would save 344.6 Billion dollars, and 31 Billion Dollars from that would go to funding a UBI, while the rest would be used to double space travel funding, double foreign aid spending, and increase social security
Yes, but it should be for people who need it the most, such as people within the poverty line or people who have low income. I also disagree because it could encourage people to not work and it could be harmful. There should be laws regulating something like this.
The people who should receive this support should be dependent on their situation. If someone who doesn't need the support is being funded this money, then that money could potentially be wasted compared to someone who needs it. For example, a single parent helping their children through college.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.