And this is why UBI was supported by right leaning economists like Milton Friedman. If we believe that people in wealthy societies should have a minimal standard of living including basic food, housing and health care then we can provide it through the market in the form of a basic income

It will avoid the perverse incentives that lead people to get costly health care in the ER (which is then covered by other patients) instead of having health insurance and receiving preventative care

It can prevent people from avoiding getting a higher income lest they start earning too much to qualify for the social programs they depend on

No UBI won't fix all problems - but it may very well pay for itself through better externalities

Friedman proposed a negative income tax which is different, and arguably better, than a standard flat payment.

It's barely distinguishable from UBI for any practical purpose.

Not really. It scales with income, motivates working, is more fair, and avoids a blanket handout which would just raise the prices of everything in response.

I think you are confused about how either UBI or negative income tax works. The most important difference is that negative income tax would do payouts once a year, and even that is not a hard requirement. Other differences are accounting differences and not practical differences in how much money people have available (as they can be made identical by tweaking the tax rates and tax brackets).

Of course both programs will guarantee a certain income, that’s the point after all.

But UBI decreases motivation while also inflating the cost of goods and services so that they rise to meet the new money supply.

NIT avoids both problems by scaling with income. It provides motivation without paying every one. More fair, less cost, and better purchasing power.

You are, frankly, just making stuff up. UBI proposals are not necessarily (nor usually) funded by creating new money supply.

Perhaps that was the wrong wording, but giving everyone money would only inflate costs as they rise to meet the new income levels (whether that money is printed or redistributed). What else are you claiming is made up?

> What else are you claiming is made up

"Motivates working, avoids a blanket handout which would just raise the prices of everything in response"

"More fair, less cost, and better purchasing power"

I mean that it's a made up difference between UBI and NIT, they are simply equal in this regard, for better or for worse.

It makes no sense that they would be different, as the net money flow between individual (or household) and the government can be made exactly the same between UBI and NIT scheme, and how much money someone actually has in their hands is what determines motivation, fairness, purchasing power, inflation etc.

Under UBI: NetMonthlyIncome = income + UBI - taxes_ubi(income)

Under NIT (where taxes_nit can yield a negative value): NetMonthlyIncome = income - taxes_nit(income)

You can make taxes_ubi(income) == taxes_nit(income) + UBI and you get the same exact real life result, it's just that the accounting is different.

UBI and NIT are two different systems that provide the same minimum income guarantee. Saying they both provide a min income is obvious. That's what they're designed to do.

However the way they do it is very different and that's what changes everything. NIT guarantees min. income without just paying everyone. This costs less than UBI. NIT pays a (negative tax) bonus on the first dollars instead of immediately taxing earnings. This provides more motivation. Not giving everyone the same helicopter money prevents cost of living inflation. This provides better purchasing power.

How you provide the income is more important the final amount because the economy is an interconnected system with secondary effects. This is why Friedman recommended NIT instead of UBI. The mechanics of the system matter.

> What's the difference between your local grocery store clerk, and a Hollywood actor?

Well, if you didn't know, there's stuff like this:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/college-bribery-scand...

The special access and leg-up in society offered to people with very high wealth (whether an actor, a corporate CxO, or someone who inherits a business empire) is huge, and entire systems are set up to tend exclusively to their needs and the preservation of those advantages.

> We provide free education through a high school diploma and community college in most areas

Can you actually do anything with just an associate's? In my experience, most places that require college degrees require a minimum of a bachelor's.

My local community college offers some bachelor degrees, and an associates degree can be a meaningful life change even if it's just a move to a management position.

> What's the difference between your local grocery store clerk, and a Hollywood actor?

One has to keep working to live a comfortable life, the other doesn't (and neither will their kids).

I agree that simply blaming the wealthy isn't the solution to these problems, but your perspective regarding the plight of the American poor seems a bit rosy to me.

> We do provide housing for the poor

Waiting lists for both subsidized housing and homeless shelters are overflowing in many places. Have you ever tried to obtain housing as a person with limited resources?

> short term homelessness outcomes are actually generally positive - we tend to get people who lose their home back into another house.

What do you mean by positive? That most people don't stay homeless forever? Sure, that's better than the alternative, but you're ignoring the consequences of becoming homeless in the first place (ex. losing a job because you don't have a place to shower, sleep, or are simply overwhelmed due to your position, eviction records that make it difficult to rent again, exposure to unsafe conditions, etc.), as well as the factors that contribute to that phenomenon.

> community college in most areas is exceedingly affordable with massive scholarship opportunities available for ivy leagues.

Community college is not as cheap as many imagine it to be. Tuition typically runs $3 - 5,000/year, which doesn't include fees, course materials, or, most notably, living expenses. Financial aid isn't as generous as many would expect - as you'll see below, a grocery store clerk earning $22,646/year would receive less than $1,500 in grant aid (while being expected to contribute ~ $4,700/annually). Loans can help, but they can also become a considerable burden, especially for the 47% percent of college students who don't end up graduating within six years (or, ever, for the majority of those students). [10] Perhaps surprisingly, the typical community college graduate actually takes around 5.5 (calendar) years to earn their associate's degree (assuming no participation in "dual enrollment"). [11] If they continue on to earn their bachelor's degree, the overall process typically takes more than 8 (calendar) years. [11] That's a long time to be in a financially-tenuous position.

I may as well ignore your comment regarding the Ivy League, as the amount of poor Americans who will find it relevant is virtually zero.

> You can walk into any hospital and it's illegal for them to refuse you treatment.

...for them to refuse you treatment for a life-threatening injury, not regular checkups, non-essential treatment or preventative medicine. And if you are treated for an emergency, you'll be billed for it later. Although the ACA has made things much better for Americans, you can't simply walk into a hospital and expect free healthcare without health insurance.

> What's the difference between your local grocery store clerk, and a Hollywood actor?

> They both likely have cars, homes and an iphone.

If your grocery-store clerk is a middle/upper-middle class teenager whose parents give them those things, sure. Otherwise, this assumption seems pretty unrealistic to me. Some quick googling seems to confirm my assessment...

According to Glassdoor, the average American grocery clerk makes $22,646/year ($1,532/month) after taxes. [1] Abodo says that rent for the median one-bedroom apartment in the US cost $1,078/month last year. [2] That doesn't include utilities, which average around $240/month for renters. [3] That leaves your grocery clerk with $214 to use for all additional expenses each month. Owning a (cheap) car costs around $486/month overall, according to Nerdwallet (including a $111 monthly car payment [4] and $118 for car insurance [5], plus misc. expenses). [6] Now this grocery clerk is going $272 further into debt each month. If they want an iPhone and a ("cheap") phone plan from a major carrier, that will cost an additional $90/month (assuming they buy the cheapest iPhone 11 and keep it for two years - $700 / 24 - and opt for the cheapest standard phone plan [7]). At that point, they're spending $362 more than they earn every month and they haven't even spent anything on food, household goods, clothing, entertainment, or education!

Assuming this person wanted to improve their financial situation by attending community college (average tuition: $3,660 for 2018/2019 year [8]), they'd be eligible to receive around $1400 in Federal Pell Grants (depending on their state) and up to $1,465 in Federal Work-study benefits (assuming their college participated in the program and that they could manage working two jobs while going to school full-time), plus up to $9,500 in Direct Stafford Loans (note: not dischargeable through bankruptcy). [9] However, they would still be expected to contribute around $4,700/year toward their education.

1. https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/grocery-clerk-salary-SRCH...

2. https://www.abodo.com/blog/2019-annual-rent-report/

3. https://www.apartmentlist.com/renter-life/average-utility-bi...

4. Calculated using https://www.cars.com/car-loan-calculator/ (assuming $5,000 car price/$500 down payment/7% sales tax/4.67% interest rate/48 month term)

5. Assuming average American cost in 2020 https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/car-insurance/average-co...

6. https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/auto-loans/total-co...

7. https://www.consumerreports.org/cell-phone-service-providers...

8. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/tuition-at-community-college...

9. Calculated using above income info via https://fafsa.ed.gov/spa/fafsa4c/#/landing (Note: "Expected Family Contribution" (EFC) ended up being around $4,700/year)

10. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/freshman-year/just-over-half...

11. https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport11/

EDIT: Correction/clarification - The average American grocery clerk makes $22,646/year, gross, which comes out to about $1,532/month after taxes.