Greentext

4741 readers

2017 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

379

Anon gets a job (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

71 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 15 hours ago

They'd basically pay it back in taxes. But the tax bill looks super unattractive for UBI for any reasonable amount ($15k is federal poverty line, which is ~$4.5T assuming 300M people).

NIT could probably replace Social Security without changing taxes at all. There are ~37M people in poverty, which is $550B, and Social Security spends $950B every year. If it replaces other welfare programs or if we lift the income cap, we could increase benefits, and states could chip in their own as well. We could also phase it in, so people under some age only get NIT, while people over some age only get SS. If it works as intended, we should decrease beneficiaries over time as people break the cycle of poverty and start businesses and whatnot.

I think it's totally feasible.