>FWIW we have had a form of UBI in the USA for decades: the earned income tax credit, which for many people amounts to a significant subsidy over and above their tax burden
How is a tax credit that you only get if you're working, and scales up depending on how much you earn (to an extent) an "universal" basic income?
>Nobody stopped working, and prices didn’t go up.
Nobody stopped working because you had to work to get the tax credit.
But the logic that having your basic needs covered makes you lazy is just ridiculous on its face. People don’t just keep working in the first thing that covers their basic expenses. They strive to advance, especially when they feel that they are not under duress.
They seek better jobs, better lives…. And a solid foundation empowers them to take the risks inherent in seeking those advancements.
How is this different from inheriting a house, or something similar? We all know that results in improved outcomes. Why would ubi be any different?
I suspect the resistance to ubi comes from the idea that “they” don’t deserve it. I would suggest to the people that think this way to ask themselves instead whether their own children deserve to grow up in a more egalitarian society where people are more free to be kind and humane, or is it better to inherit a world where half the population is scratching in the dirt and throwing elbows just to feed their kids?
How is a tax credit that you only get if you're working, and scales up depending on how much you earn (to an extent) an "universal" basic income?
>Nobody stopped working, and prices didn’t go up.
Nobody stopped working because you had to work to get the tax credit.