LA found recently that it was paying more to administer "welfare" as it was paying in welfare. Welfare administration costs are mostly to detect fraud. A UBI would be much cheaper to administer because there is little fraud - everyone gets a monthly check regardless. Which would about double the total that could be paid over present "welfare", which would be eliminated. One more reason for looking at UBI.
You can do whatever you want after receiving your UBI. No "user the table" is necessary. The point of UBI is an income to insure that your basic needs are met, and then you can do whatever you like. An argument against UBI is that once basic needs are met, people will do nothing. This study proves otherwise, that people after receiving a UBI seek out work to increase their income. Your plan only validates the conclusion of the study.
Slashdot Mirror
LA found recently that it was paying more to administer "welfare" as it was paying in welfare. Welfare administration costs are mostly to detect fraud. A UBI would be much cheaper to administer because there is little fraud - everyone gets a monthly check regardless. Which would about double the total that could be paid over present "welfare", which would be eliminated. One more reason for looking at UBI.
And you would be welcome to do so. No "under the table" needed. Your plan just cofirms the result of the study.
You can do whatever you want after receiving your UBI. No "user the table" is necessary. The point of UBI is an income to insure that your basic needs are met, and then you can do whatever you like. An argument against UBI is that once basic needs are met, people will do nothing. This study proves otherwise, that people after receiving a UBI seek out work to increase their income. Your plan only validates the conclusion of the study.