Instigator / Pro
A UBI would be beneficial to the economy and the society
The voting period has ended
After not so many votes, surprise surprise...
It's a tie!
Time for argument
Characters per argument
Contender / Con
Hello! With the 2020 American election coming up, I can't but wonder about Yang's plan for a UBI. It's certainly a unique plan, but is it a good thing to have or an accident just waiting to unfold?
Hello Madman. Glad you could accept my debate. Let's begin...
What is a UBI?
A UBI is a program made by the government, that gives a certain set amount of money to people per time period regardless. For this debate, we will be saying that the UBI in this case would be given out every month of a sum of $1000 to every person over 18. Now you can base your example in preferably Canada or the United States, but you are allowed to use any country as an example.
UBI isn't a new concept. It was around for quite a while actually, but it only gained traction once presidential candidate Andrew Yang announced his plan for a UBI. He stated that his plan would give $1000 to every person in America over the age of 18 per month. Relating that back to thing debate, he has proven over and over again that a UBI can be paid for, so arguments concerning how expensive a UBI would be are almost irrelevant.
How does a UBI benefit the economy?
Right now, America's economy is dying. Millions of jobs are lost to automation, and millions more will be lost in the upcoming years with further and new technological developments. This means that millions are losing their jobs. So what happens when people lose their jobs? Then people can't pay their bills. That means people will start to cut down on their spendings like food, clothes, and other accessories. And what does this mean for the economy? That means that people aren't necessarily spending a lot of money, or in other words, money isn't getting recycled through the economy. This tends to lead to a dry economy, with many stores closing down, and not any traces of money circulating around.
That's where UBI comes in. UBI helps the economy by giving people a little bit of extra money for them to spend. This spent money will circulate through the economy and renew it in a way. It can create thousands if not millions of jobs, and will boost the economy greatly. Now instead of going from paycheck to paycheck, people can now take time to buy quality goods, and companies and shops can now sell more goods. I will elaborate on these effects in my next speech.
Well, that's all from me for now, thank you again for accepting my speech, and I will see you soon. Good luck!
Copy-pasting myself from this debate: https://www.debateart.com/debates/1214/a-citizens-dividend
Outline of my case:
- UBI assumes everyone is entitled to some money for being born of the human species even if a non-human was suffering more or did more for the society. This irrational assumption has always been a confusing flaw of both pro-lifers and socialists that I never understood so believe me I'll have a lot to say on it in R2.
- UBI focuses solely on income. Splitting between many bank accounts, having money in property as opposed to direct cash and a couple of others means of loopholes will lead to complete exploitation of the system that enables the middle class to appear like the working class under it and drain away from the rich, that would severely amplify my point 3.
- The rich are very blatantly rich enough to leave the nation. They'd leave...
4. There's no realistic motive to work under UBI. Boredom, pride and integrity all fall short of the urge to rest and stagnate unless there's negative feedback for doing something as proven by any and all examples of Communism in human history as well the impossibility of that system not turning into tyranny that facades as 'caring Socialists'.
5. The system will backfire and drive those who don't want the lazy to get free cash to vote for very right-wing alternatives since almost all nations revolve around a 'this or that' two-party-choice dynamic.
The poor in UBI are not the only recipients of it at all. No matter what you set the UBI to be, it's either so low it's toxic for the poor or so high that the middle class begin to abuse it as well as working-middle class inbetweeners who can otherwise cope. It literally goes by income alone, I don't even think I need to use a source to prove this. It doesn't calculate how much you have in property, estate etc. It just says 'if you lack this directly in your bank at this time, we'll top it up'. Actually everyone is topped up but the richer are paying more than they're gaining back so the surplus is how it's funded tax-wise.
As soon as the medium and medium-low earners learn this loophole, they will minimise their income bracket to just below whatever staggered levels there are to calculate the amount you owe in tax to the UBI system (which has to be progressively taxed to make any sense at all). There is no reason at all to push yourself up above the line of an income bracket because you will pay more and gain less relatively (you don't get more, the more you put in etc). People will even take out cash in hand to ensure that on 'payday' for UBI they are scoring very low. What they have in their account when the UBI is delivered on its monthly basis or whatever, is able to be as much as possible, they'll get the same UBI physically put into their account regardless of income, let alone true worth in assets.
Hello and thank you for following through. I would like to start off this debate with some clash.
I'm sorry but we're talking about humans in this case.
loopholes will lead to complete exploitation of the system
Loop holes? A complete exploitation? I believe that the people in charge will think and design this system out thoroughly, for example sending money based on ID verification. and even if there were some sort of exportation going on, the politicians would catch up very quickly and adjust accordingly. And please back up your claims with actual evidence, not just random speculation.
Hmm... not sure where you came up with that from, but I do not see a good reason for the rich to "leave". Oh, and did I mention that many millionaires and billionaires actually support UBI? This includes Mark Zuckerburg and Elon Musk.
There's no realistic motive to work under UBI
$1000 a month isn't enough to quit work. This has been proven many times before, the most prominent example being in Alaska. The Alaskan people love it, and they're economy is active and supportive. A UBI in some ways can actually motivate people do do work, since they aren't being dragged down by all their bills and payments. The people now have a new focus, maybe it's working for a vacation, or saving up for a new car. Whatever the case, a UBI does not make people work less, if anything, it may encourage them to work more.
don't want the lazy [...] vote for very right-wing alternative
Like I was saying before, this wouldn't make people lazy, and let's just say it did. That wouldn't be a strong enough motivation for people to vote for every right-wing alternative.
it's either so low it's toxic for the poor ...
That statement proves that you didn't even read my previous speech, or even glanced in the comments section. What do you mean "so low"? $1000 a month isn't "low". It may to low to the upper class, but for middle and lower class families, it's a huge help! In fact, a UBI can double the income for 10% of the American population!
I don't even think I need to use a source to prove this.
Actually you do. You have provided exactly 0 sources in your speech.
It doesn't calculate how much you have in property, estate etc
Exactly. A UBI is designed to give everyone money, free of discrimination. That's what a UBI is.
they will minimise their income bracket to just below whatever staggered levels there are to calculate the amount you owe in tax to the UBI system
Sorry, but I'm really confused on this. Perhaps some concrete evidence would help?
UBI is a great solution to the increasing job loss in countries around the world. It accounts for hard working individuals, and even stay at home parents. With $1000 a month, people would get the help they need, and could renew the economy even more. With all of this being said, this is why a UBI would be beneficial to the economy and society.
UBI is simple. Give money to everyone, then they pay based on income back to it. It's so stupid that it doesn't account for what you own in estate, or even in cash in hand it goes by your account and that's it.
Hmm... I was thinking about defining that in the debate, but I guess it wouldn't hurt now.
I don't want to give an exact amount, but around 850 - 1000 per month should be fine. I'm basing this off Andrew Yang's idea.
How much would each citizen get? I think that would be vital information for this debate.
No votes yet