Björn Friðgeir: Countries which, while rich enough, have insufficient support for the unfortunates in society.

Denver gave people experiencing homelessness $1,000 a month. Results showed that close to half of the participants secured housing, and nearly $600K saved in public service costs due to fewer ER visits & jail stays. They also saw improved mental health.

Denver gave people experiencing homelessness $1,000 a month. A year later, nearly half of participants had housing.www.yahoo.com Participants in Denver's basic income program received up to $1,000 a month. They became more housing secure and landed full-time jobs.

Weird how that keeps happening. After this many trials if UBI was a drug it would already be marketed.

Point: here in a civilised country just about the lowest benefits you get from the government is $2,000. Unemployment, disability etc. They can get higher. The UBI idea is that it replaces All Other Benefits. And it is easy to see why it needs to be way higher than $1,000 1/2

I agree with many of your points, but it's not fair to paint the concept of UBI as one singular idea, and especially one where "All Other Benefits" are abandoned. I think I've only seen this extreme suggested by children, right-wing libertarian nutters, and people who hate the thought of UBI, obv.

Fair enough. The reason it has been painted this way is that the sheer amount involved means that putting it on top of the current system (even in uncivilised countries) isn't really feasible (until the revolution comes and i'll probably be one of those up against the wall then in any case)

Wth are 'uncivilised countries?'

Countries which, while rich enough, have insufficient support for the unfortunates in society.

Mk western countries i.e.

Specifically the US. Most of the others at least try.

Post