Topic: Should UBI Replace all Welfare Systems? - page 4. (Read 1349 times)

I can already imagine...

"Oh, I'm already out of money and unemployed but I need to have an emergency surgery done. Would you really be so cruel to not help me? It's just money, I will pay you back, I swear! Don't be so heartless!  "

Dang, you're right. I should have dug a little deeper. I found an article about the explanation: https://globalnews.ca/news/4365399/ontario-cancels-basic-income-pilot-project/. It looks like payments will actually end this month. They suggest that the program discouraged people from finding work. Participants seem to be refuting that claim though. They explain how UBI gave them the opportunity to go back to school while keeping a part-time job. They are saying that it's probably got more to do with cutting the budget. It seems a bit ridiculous to cancel the pilot program. They could at least see it out to get some good data.

Would you really want the government to have that much control in your life? That does not sound like a good idea at all to me.

A couple points that people neglect or ignore that are important to this issue:
1. The banking system is a legal world Ponzi;
2. A person is any document that reflects a human being or some other person.

The government set up the banking Ponzi back in 1913. All Ponzi's need an influx of people/persons to remain "alive." So far corporations (persons) and world people (persons) are the things that are keeping the Federal Reserve banking Ponzi alive. But we are running out of people. If suddenly there is a national required UBI, there will suddenly be a whole lot of persons that will be receiving additional funds, while inflation can grow, again, to scoop up more of the property of the world. These persons are the things that are keeping the banking Ponzi alive.

What is a person? It is paperwork with your name on it. Your driver's license might identify you, but it is a person. Your phone bill name is a person. Your electric bill name is a person. The name on each of your bank accounts might identify you, but they are not you. They are persons.

How can you tell? Get out your electric bill agreement that you signed up for electricity with. It has your name and address on it. But it is not you. Get your kitchen butcher knife out, and stab it. It doesn't bleed like you would if you were stabbed the same way.

UBI will give the government and banking system more breathing room by creating a whole new bunch of legitimate persons. And that is what they need to keep a Ponzi alive. We barely understand what is going on... while they take up ownership of the world.

While it sounds nice getting "free" money especially if you're not making much, could this still lead back to the same problems of dependency? You get the same amount of money whether you work or not anyway.

People might be motivated to better themselves if actual welfare is cut off but should these people fail to save up and end up in emergencies, it's likely the other taxpayers would still have to break their fall.

If we ever get to using UBI I hope it's some sort of blockchain system where every detail of expenses are tracked and the gov't can block certain purchases or impose limits or outright cut off the money if it's being wasted.


Cutting out welfare might probably cut down on illegal immigration more than any wall, me thinks. I mean, look at those men with multiple wives migrating to Europe and living off welfare they are getting through the children and not working. Many of those were already in there before the rise of ISIS.


Unfortunately. That's how the system perpetuate itself. Sure there are honest politicians but many would definitely try to take advantage, especially since they are the ones who write the laws and implement them.

Just a heads up. The Ontario pilot program is being scrapped early by the incoming provincial government.

This program was part of my basis for why politicians will be the downfall of a reasonable test or Implementation.

Don't worry though they are pushing to bring back "buck a beer"... or to  non Canadians 1 dollar beer.

I can agree that there will probably be less fraud. It's a bit simpler to fake income than to create a completely new identity.

I was just reading about a pilot program that's happening right now in Ontario, Canada, if I understand correctly: https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontario-basic-income-pilot. The numbers there are quite similar to what we've been talking about here. It's intended to be an "income that will meet household costs and average health-related spending." This is how much there's giving:
It's only for people that are earning less than $30,000 or $48,000 as a couple. It seems a little weird to me. It you make $20,000, they'll only give you about $7000. They you'll have $27,000. If you don't work at all, you'll have $17,000. It seems like there could still be a tendency to work less. There would definitely be a huge desire to falsify income info, when every dollar means you lose 50 cents of what the government would give you. It looks like the first pilot program may actually be complete, but I can find the details yet.

You have to understand that the welfare fraud which is present now is probably a lot more prevalent then it could be if UBI is present. Because with the current welfare system, if you fake your income levels (or something along these lines) you're going to be allowed to get welfare.

UBI is a system which gives to all (maybe capped out a certain point, but still) and avoids the tediousness of having to screen mass amounts of people.

Yeah, I'm sure there would be loads of fraud. That would take another whole government department to deal with. I wonder if your idea is anything similar to the movie Into the Wild. If I remember correctly, the guy burns all his document. Then later, for some reason he decides he needs some document. He comes to a homeless shelter in California and real quick they did him up some new documents just based on what he said. I wonder why illegal immigrants don't do that. Well, I guess some of them probably do, we just don't think they're illegal immigrants. Haha!

If it's not a word, it sure as shit should be.

I don't think politicians and people in government are dumb, I think they're just stalling progress in order to keep their voters happy -- or (on the other end of things) promising so much that they know none of it isn't going to happen in order to keep their voters happy.

We're a different country in the United States, it's something that people have failed to notice for generations.


There's only so much that a city can give, the federal government (or state governments) can give a good amount more.

UBI is a good idea for government to use on us. I say this from a personal advantage.

Most folks out there will be reduced to poverty (or greater poverty, if they are in poverty, already) with UBI. But because I know how to create multiple persons that all have my name (not that other people can't do this), and since I know how to assign the SSN (Social Security Number) from my SS person to other of my persons so that they can use it as well, and since I know how to benefit off all my persons, and legally protect myself from government officials who think I am doing something illegal (which I am not), I know how to make way more money (or live without it) than the simple UBI amounts.

So, UBI is a good thing for me. It takes property (in the form of money) from the people, and funnels some of it to me.

Unfortunately, the point you brought up here is so true. Politicians will always avoid making highly controversial decisions. I just did some Googling though and I see some hopeful things. Wikipedia talks about some polls. It says that "in 2016 a poll showed that 58 percent of the European people are aware of basic income and 65 percent would vote in favor of the idea." Here's only about the US: "2017: POLITICO/Morning Consult asked 1994 Americans about their opinions on several political issues. One question addressed attitudes towards a national basic income in the United States. 43 percent either ‘strongly supported’ or ‘somewhat supported’ the idea." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income)

It seems like many places are trying to pilot the idea. I may become a reality sooner than we expect. One of the first results in my search was actually from Chicago. The government there is considering giving it a try, but the amount seems pretty low to me, $500/month. (https://freebeacon.com/issues/chicago-officials-looking-universal-basic-income-program/)

The politicization (is that even a word?) of some of these issues is beyond ridiculous. You'd think we should at least agree that these things are important but there is a large percentage of population and politicians who appear to think that being dumb and sick is guaranteed by the 1st amendment.

Ironically the US being so backwards e.g. in healthcare could be an advantage - we could look around at how this is solved in other countries, learn from their mistakes, and build a better system. I'm laughing just typing this. Not happening in my lifetime.

To the first part, it would be the case that everyone does get 13,000 each -- it's not dependent on marital status. Though I would like to have it linked to if you're a dependent or age (or dependent status) As it does seem pretty hard to remove the abuse that may come forth when people are popping out kids just for the reason of getting 13,000 a year (if their children weren't listed as depents or something along these lines)

I don't really know how children would be treated, as this is the only area I can see that COULD be prone to abuse -- though I don't think the abuse is as catastrophic as the current welfare system.


The problem with all of the things that were listed that needs fixing -- such as Education -- is that it's not like we havn't tried to fix these. It's just that we can't agree (the people and government) on HOW to fix these issues in Education, Healthcare, etc. Many things have been tried, but nothing has stuck and worked (to a large extent in the last 10 or so years)


The difference between us debating on here, and governments is that the people in government need their constituents votes in order to stay in power while I'm just a guy on the internet. I can say the truth, and what I think should be done to fix systems.

Politicans must say what is best for them to stay in power, and I guess they've assumed that not supporting UBI is one of those things -- sadly.

My Healthcare writeup will come at some point, haven't gotten around to it yet. Sorry folks!

I don't think there's any need to be so aggressive about it. There are plenty of good arguments against UBI. I don't think they make the people against UBI evil.

You raise a really good point about how much we are working. People work so much these days, but we clearly don't need it. So many things are produced in excess. If you just look at food waste around the world, it's astounding! I've heard number at over 50% of food produced going to waste. Why the hell are we producing more than twice the amount of food we eat? That's not to mention that we don't even need to eat all the food we are eating. Obesity rates are going up all over the world. Companies purposefully produce things with planned obsolescence. We just constantly produce and consume. It would be better to produce smarter and better quality. I'm sure we could cut down on work our by dozens of percent.

People against UBI are truly evil people.  UBI will drastically lower the crime rates and impove mental health for everyone.

We are supposedly more advanced than ever before but the modern human works much more than a hunter gather ever had to.

The vast majority of new wealth created goes straight to the top, the wealth inequality in this world is disturbing, 4 people own more than the entire bottom half of the popuatlion.

NO ONE IS SELF MADE, every wealthy person relies on this society and other people, without other people they wouldn't have wealth.

Every Fucking piece of land on this earth is "owned" what a joke, you can't even live in freedom if you want.

Support UBI

The more we talk about it, the more it seems like it would be much less simple than was originally proposed. The idea of just giving every person an equal amount of money every month quickly became something else. What ago should they start receiving it? What about then they're too old to work anymore to supplement the UBI? How do you determine how old is too old to work? What if somebody is married? What if somebody has kids to support? What if somebody already makes a lot of money? What is somebody is from a poor area and another person lives in an expensive city? It seems like we'd still need big government organizations to regulate it all. 

You're not wrong but I feel any system that looks to encompass a large group of people living in inequality will be complex in nature. The checks and balances of this system would again have to be hammered out by the administering government, and be open to adapting to changing circumstances. Admittedly something governments are becoming worse at as time goes on. For my country it would probably fall into the category of filing tax returns that would help to decide what is a couple or not, again there will be the couples that are "roomates" for life. No matter the system for regulating anything there will be those who find a way around it.


It's good to dream and there is nothing wrong with wanting more regardless of being single or having a family. I can understand the wanting to make sure a family is covered no matter what happens. Another nice bonus, to a UBI or other programs.

You obviously forgot your tinfoil hat, and to spin around 3 times in each doorway before turning on your computer if they know where to take a hit out.

On the other hand, we wouldn't want to falsely categorize otherwise unrelated people living at the same address (e.g. roommates) as "partners" and reduce their UBI, right? This gets very complicated very quickly.

Overall the main thing making me extremely skeptical towards UBI is that it is loved both by bright-red socialists and hardcode libertarians, which seems to indicate that the idea is unworkable in practice. It won't improve social fairness and it won't eliminate the state's responsibility for welfare, or achieve whatever other goals those groups might ascribe to UBI. In practice this would be a welfare system under a different name, with a bunch of exceptions and limitations and lots and lots of regulation.

Or we could focus on what has been working reasonably well if not perfectly, e.g. improving education, healthcare, public safety, infrastructure, etc to give people a better chance at upward mobility plus a decent safety net, boring as it may be.

I like your straightforward approach but I do not believe that children should be considered in the universal equation as "equals". I would not be opposed in any way to having a smaller portion allotted for a household with children as there is a substantial cost increase associated. Believe me I know
I also believe there will still need to be considerations taken for the disabled and elderly, to ensure proper care. Especially when both groups can at times be mistreated, forgotten or taken advantage of.

Again the UBI, is not meant to be something you can make a living off, it is supposed to help everyone have the opportunity to meet the basic necessities of life, but not being limited to lower income earners. It also is not tied to only being able to spend the money in a certain way, it is your income, which also has the potential for abuse. I just rarely any program should be tweaked based on the small number of people abusing it. The fine tuning of how benefits are calculated and paid, should be something we can learn from these experiments if they are run start to finish and analysed in an unbiased manner. 

To touch back on the shitloads you describe, yes there may be something along those lines. I imagine then that they would have to be looked at tin the same way as a common law relationship is. Which most of the time is no different than married. The added cost of a new address would negate the gains these people may be trying to grab.

It is also currently happening or at least being considered.
https://www.today.com/health/happily-married-couple-considers-divorce-pay-daughter-s-health-care-t132915

LOL I can only dream I have enough LOL.  I want more don't get me wrong, I would like nothing more than to be able to provide my wife and kids with a substantial nest egg should something happen to me (like the deep state lizzard pedo's taking a hit out on me   !!!!!!!!!) but I don't want it from people with much less than I currently have!