• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
Universal is generally considered to mean in terms of who it covers, not how much money it is or what other benefits are available.
Yes and it wouldn't cover everyone.

Universal healthcare isn't "healthcare for everyone who wants it" it's "everyone has health insurance".
 

icyflamez96

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,590
You're leaving a lot out of your analysis here.
For one families and disabled people stack benefits, so it could be SNAP, WIC, SSI, Unemployment, ect under the same roof. Means testing needs to go away. Which is another reason any serious UBI proposal should stack with all current welfare programs.

And you've shifted the goal post from "Not arbitrary" to "*not that arbitrary*". The goal has also shifted from universal to "somewhat universal as long as you don't want to keep your benefits".

Oh I see, and yes I do think it would be better and cleaner if they could stack with those other existing things. However I don't think that completely kills it. The average welfare recipient in the US is getting around $300 a month. UBI will give these people much more and more freedom when it comes to other life choices since the 1000 dollars is guaranteed no matter what. Anyone who is getting above 1000 a month in those types of welfare programs can just not opt in (I'm not sure what the stats are on who gets that much in total welfare each month).

Did I ever say it wasn't arbitrary? You said it's straight up arbitrary I said it's not as arbitrary as you're making it out to be imo. Doubling the FD would be a LOT more money to fund.

I'm not sure what you mean that my goal was shifted from universal to somewhat universal. You gave me the deets and I see what you mean about it not being totally universal. I don't think that makes the FD not still really good though, but improvement could be had in that area yes.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,154
Limburg
Oh I see, and yes I do think it would be better and cleaner if they could stack with those other existing things. However I don't think that completely kills it. The average welfare recipient in the US is getting around $300 a month. UBI will give these people much more and more freedom when it comes to other life choices since the 1000 dollars is guaranteed no matter what. Anyone who is getting above 1000 a month in those types of welfare programs can just not opt in (I'm not sure what the stats are on who gets that much in total welfare each month).

Did I ever say it wasn't arbitrary? You said it's straight up arbitrary I said it's not as arbitrary as you're making it out to be imo. Doubling the FD would be a LOT more money to fund.

I'm not sure what you mean that my goal was shifted from universal to somewhat universal. You gave me the deets and I see what you mean about it not being totally universal. I don't think that makes the FD not still really good though, but improvement could be had in that area yes.

Yang is marketing it as universal, when it isn't. It doesn't stack and isn't for everyone.

Saying it isn't *that arbitrary* assumes that it is in fact arbitrary to some degree and not indexed to what your average person needs per month.
 

icyflamez96

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,590
Yang is marketing it as universal, when it isn't. It doesn't stack and isn't for everyone.

Saying it isn't *that arbitrary* assumes that it is in fact arbitrary to some degree and not indexed to what your average person needs per month.

I always took the universal to mean it's available for anyone to opt in. The topic of switching to the FD perhaps not being worth it in to people in some cases because of SSI is aknowledged even on his website. But despite that still think it's good for the vast majority of people.

I can't land on exactly how arbitrary it is or isn't. When I say "not that arbitrary" I'm directly referring to it not being as arbitrary as you were saying. E.G. I really don't think it could just be doubled from where it already is. (And 12,000 a year is very close to the poverty threshold)
 

Denamitea

Member
Nov 1, 2017
2,712
I admit, I got a good chuckle out of this, but there was definitely a poster here completely convinced that Yang was going to win and accused everyone that disagreed, that didn't take Yang's candidacy seriously, of racism...
Yeah, I think I remember who you're talking about. Or at least I remember someone posting stuff like that