19 Total Votes


9 votes


7 votes


3 votes
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
MitchV says2018-07-08T17:50:25.1462926Z
Need a fourth option. 4 Neither. UBI is just stupid as it provides no incentive to work. This would greatly increase the number of unemployed. With so many not working, who would be paying taxes for such a program? The remaining tax payers. Well, if working means you get to keep less of your income, why work? If you want companies to pay the extra, then they will just move to places overseas where there tax burden is less. As far as welfare, I am proud that I work for my income. Unfortunately, far too many are raised in welfare homes so they tend to look at the working man as a sucker. Instead of welfare, I suggest public programs similar to the PWA & WPA were people would be required to work on public projects to get the income. Of course, this would be with an exception to people who can not perform any type of work due to physical and mental disabilities. Note the word "and". This is because a person with mental disabilities can still shovel dirt/gravel and people with physical disabilities can still do clerical or phone work.
asta says2018-07-08T22:35:36.7533500Z
What is PWA and WPA?
JoeDaddy says2018-07-09T11:52:41.7239962Z
Neither, it is better to incentivize people to lift themselves up from poverty, instead of giving people free stuff. The ones who are lazy and won't work in a free market are the ones who don't survive. A life where your decisions matter, and the government doesn't take care of you, and makes you stay impoverished, genius am I right?
MitchV says2018-07-09T13:17:56.1839962Z
@asta, PWA (Public Works Administration) was a program designed to help people get jobs during the great depression. It hired the unemployed to work on large scale projects like dams, bridges, hospitals and schools. The WPA (Works Progress Administration) did similar smaller projects but hired mainly unskilled workers. Tho it they were intended to provide income for men who lost income during the depression. At around the same time, the welfare programs came to be to aid widowed mothers to maintain their household.
Voly says2018-07-10T04:21:36.7332272Z
Where is the "none" option? Distribution of wealth leads to a lack of productivity and economic growth.
chaz8180 says2018-09-16T07:54:04.5097950Z
Both are utter garbage.
Christhechris says2018-09-18T15:08:12.4722845Z
Neither, Abolish the welfare state.
Christhechris says2018-09-18T15:08:44.5146845Z
Neither, Abolish the welfare state.
billsands says2018-12-28T00:19:21.1043529Z
sergeysn says2019-01-29T23:28:21.8355844Z
yuhancui0726 says2019-03-10T20:14:44.2212750Z
You guys are all filthy capitalist. Do you know that "inequality actually undermines a person's willingness to protect the environment"? As the economist Lucas Chancel explains.
Hrazov says2019-11-26T12:27:38.2772290Z
UBI will support working people, While those unable to work will depend on welfare. With high progressive taxation this will lead towards more equality between classes and hopefully to classless society, Where everything is automated. Automation is big concern towards our future and it should free us from work so we can invest into ourselves and our families: we can continue going to further our knowledge, Discover new things and hopefully go to space to live in post-scarcity society.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.