• daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Giving everyone, even millionaires, 500€ a month is an unreasonable application of UBI. It makes no sense doing it that way. No sense whatsoever.

    Traditional welfare can run off, as it’s a program with X amount of money attached to it, UBI is not linked to allocated resources, so it doesn’t run off.

    This the difference between traditional welfare and UBI is that UBI is given to EVERYone who needs it. As before welfare programs traditionally ran of of money before reaching everyone. There’s no need, and it makes no sense to just give everyone money that it’s going to instantly vaporize (via taxes or inflation)

    • spirinolas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’m not debating the merits of UBI. All I’m saying is UBI is, by definition, unconditional.

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Maybe. But given the unreasonable approach of a radical UBI I thought reasonable that more people understood the GMI approach as the way to actually materialize an UBI.

        I stand corrected as it’s clear that many people actually believe that a pure UBI is somehow feasible as it’s simplest definition.

        It’s like when talking about democracy we are not talking about ancient greek democracy but about modern democracy instead.

        • spirinolas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          GMI has the problems you yourself stated. When someone working earns as much as someone on GMI they are bound to feel resentment.