|
|
 Originally Posted by BananaStand
Why? What's wrong with welfare if it's used as a safety net for people who are underprivileged or experiencing hardship? What "problem" does this create that needs to be solved with UBI?
Who decides who is underprivileged or experiencing hardship? Who decides how to measure those?
These questions are essentially what has taken a welfare system that was intended to work exactly the way you describe it should work to its rent-seeking, production-stripping, poverty-inducing system it is now.
Also, if we're examining incentives, we want to ask why would we want a government provided "safety net" in the first place. A "safety net" brings with it its own set of problems, like disincentivizing financial responsibility and saving/investment, incentivizing short-term pleasure driven consumerism, disincentivizing strong family/community relationships, incentivizing increased undue risk-taking, and many others.
I don't want the government to provide a "safety net" because I believe it makes people worse off.
|
Reply With Quote