by Steve James on Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:57 am
Universal doesn't have to mean that everyone "gets" something. It can mean that everyone "has" something. (That's unlike our present Social Security where everyone, even the richest, contribute to the system and therefore receive benefits. Gate, Musk, Bezos, and Buffett will receive SS whether they need it or not). The degree of "need" is not universal, even among the poorest.
There could be a "base" income that families who didn't make above a certain level would get, but it would have to be different from state to state. I wouldn't predict it, but I think some people might prefer to be poor in some places instead of others. And, that's the other half of income problem: i.e., where does the money come in the first place? If it's from taxes, people in the populous states, the wealthy, and the "small business owners" will not want to support people in other states.
It also seems that people equate "income" with buying potential, and that we expect people who receive it to buy what we think they should. Sure, I see people using their food program cards to buy cigarettes and beer. But, not even poor people live on beer and cigarettes. They eat like ... most of the people, and are just as honest or not.
Well, imo, universal health care makes more sense, and we know how many people feel about that. Of course, we have food programs and public housing. However, the former are all being threatened, and few people want to live in public housing.
The fact is that we spend money on other things, including "defense" --which means subsidizing the defense industry. The argument is that it's more important to bail out a bank than forgive a student loan.
Nobody wants "socialism," but everybody thinks the government owes them something --including allowing them to f over someone else. That idea is so good that some argue that it's God's plan, which is New Testament irony. My point is that this really isn't a matter of money, or wealth redistribution, or socialism. It's a question of why someone would want someone else to have something. That reason might be religious; it might be because one sees them as family, neighbors, or friends. It might be altruism. The reason isn't important; only the desire. The dollars and cents are solvable after that. Without it, people will see it in terms of personal gain and loss.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."