A Universal Basic Income program is social security program where all citizens of a country receive a regular, unconditional sum of money from the government. The funding for Universal Basic Income comes from taxation and government owned entities including income from endowments, real estate and natural resources. Several countries, including Finland, India and Brazil, have experimented with a UBI system but have not implemented a permanent program. The longest running UBI system in the world is the Alaska Permanent Fund in the U.S. state of Alaska. In the Alaska Permanent Fund each individual and family receives a monthly sum that is funded by dividends from the state’s oil revenues. Proponents of UBI argue that it will reduce or eliminate poverty by providing everyone with a basic income to cover housing and food. Opponents argue that a UBI would be detrimental to economies by encouraging people to either work less or drop out of the workforce entirely.
@8QYJ7B54mos
Yes, in the form of a Negative Income Tax to cover basic necessities including food and housing
@8QYJ7B54mos
Yes, but in the form of an opt-in, generous "Negative Income Tax"
@DengekiMatsuko6mos
Yes, but for those who are out of work and are actively looking for a job
@94267X26mos
I support paying women to stay at home and have a lot of kids
@9425J2G6mos
With an income cutoff - Stop making the rich richer and the poor stuck.
@93ZQDBJ6mos
UBI should be offered to people in poverty to increase the middle class and given as a temporary option to those who cannot support themselves.
Deleted7mos
Yes, but only for those who work and have kids.
@8VG8DZB7mos
@93VGL9L7mos
Yes, everyone should receive an income to cover basic necessities including food and housing, but only on a temporary/test basis. This way the government can get a baseline sense of the funding required to reduce food/housing disparity and can gauge the success of the program prior to deciding whether or not to implement long term.
@57QKT6T7mos
Yes, we are rapidly coming to a point in time where automation will make it difficult for everyone to find a job, especially those with disabilities or other factors preventing them from "moving up" in the world; all citizens should have their basic needs met with the option of working to gain more money for extras.
@92JXK3J7mos
No. I support a National Dividend and Social Credit program as proposed by economist CH Douglas. I think it could solve the problems of UBI but also provide some of the positives of the UBI.
@92C6SMF7mos
No, universal basic income would cause inflation and no net change in people's quality of life.
Deleted7mos
No, rich do not need welfare.
@EthanHars8mos
Yes, this should repeal and replace all existing welfare programs
@93CS3TH8mos
We should wait to consider a program like this until more data is avaliable.
@93BDMP68mos
Yes, if all other forms of welfare are eliminated and there are no income phase-outs
Deleted8mos
No, it is too much expensive.
@Panagioti9998mos
No, expand other social welfare programs like Medicare/Medicaid, food stamps, and housing assistance instead. UBI is a back door to austerity.
Deleted9mos
Yes, for those who work.
Deleted9mos
Only for those who work
@934R57G9mos
Yes, as the automation takes over jobs, the humans will need to live.
@9324D729mos
No, the government should provide housing, food, and amenities to those who need it instead of letting profit-driven corporations control the flow of necessities.
@4PTBWS59mos
Yes, and index it on productivity.
@92NYS4X9mos
yes, but it should be slowly phased out and replaced with better social safety nets
@8532KYJ9mos
Yes, but it should not be universal, it should only go to the impoverished, the working poor, and lower middle class families
@92JXK3J9mos
No. I support a National Dividend and Social Credit program.
@92GWJXX10mos
Yes, everyone should receive an income to cover basic necessities including food and housing but they should also work.
Deleted10mos
Yes for lower income brackets; but the wealthy should not qualify for this program, this would be a waste of resources.
Deleted10mos
No, unless it is exclusively for families and/or owners of government bonds.
Deleted10mos
Yes, everyone should receive an income to cover basic necessities including food and housing but they should still work.
@929M4SL10mos
Yes, but we should abolish all other welfare programs.
@927693910mos
Yes, but make it a requirement to be employed in order to apply, then subtract their U.B.I. from their normal paycheck.
@923Z93G10mos
Yes, but only provide enough to cover the minimum necessities
Deleted11mos
Yes, but only in the form of a social dividend
@ThomasJ47611mos
Yes, everyone should receive an income to cover basic necessities including food and housing but only if they work.
Deleted11mos
Yes, but in the form of a social dividend
@JaredForALGov11mos
Yes, and we need to account for basic human necessities (food, water, & housing) and prevent this type of income from disenfranchising the disabled citizens of our country.
@7PTCG3811mos
No, this would create the need for drastic restructuring of funding for existing social programs, and such a plan would be too difficult to administer as the cost-of-living varies greatly in different regions of the country. Expand existing social programs instead by raising their income cap so more people can qualify for their benefits
@heatherdvdprince…11mos
No, this will encourage people not to work, harm economic growth, give the government more power, increase national debt, and let the communists finish taking over (especially the politicians)
@rightandbased11mos
No, this will encourage people not to work and harm their spiritual, mental, and social well-being.
@3TVP8HD11mos
Yes, and abolish all welfare programs
@7PTCG3811mos
No, this would create the need for drastic restructuring of funding for existing social programs, and the plan would be difficult to administer as the cost-of-living varies greatly in different regions of the country. Expand existing social programs instead by raising their income cap so more people can qualify for their benefits
@7PTCG3811mos
No, this would create the need for drastic restructuring of funding for existing social programs, and the plan would be difficult to administer as the cost-of-living varies greatly in different regions of the country. Expand existing social programs instead by raising their income cap so more people qualify for their benefits
@7PTCG3811mos
No, this would create the need for drastic restructuring of funding for existing social programs, and the program would be difficult to administer as the cost-of-living varies greatly in different regions of the country. Expand existing social programs instead by raising the income cap so more people qualify for their benefits.
@8ZH98TQ11mos
This could harm economic growth so maybe only temporarily give to people with low income
@8ZGPKM911mos
yes its fun working to help the area your living in when they are struggling and overall
@3HS499C11mos
Yes, only for individuals who are senior and disabled
@8ZG2P7711mos
yes, but under certain circumstances
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
