Those seem incompatible to me.

(UBI means Universal Basic Income, giving everyone a basic income, for free)

  • floridaman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    A means tested basic income is a type of BI that, as proposed by the institute on race and political economy in the US, expands the Earned Income Tax Credit program to include those who aren’t earning an income, providing every adult in the country up to $12,500 per year calculated on a sliding scale based on income, as well as up to $4,500 per child. These numbers are as of 2021 so they could’ve changed by now, but basically it gives everyone a certain amount of money if they are below the poverty line (calculated by their current income), to lift them above the poverty line and keep them out of poverty.

    It’s more, I guess you could call it a niche, type of basic income so it’s on me for not explaining it, just used to everyone in our debate season already knowing what it is lol, sorry.

    • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      That is not basic income. It is decreased as you earn your own money. It only comes as a tax rebate. Neither of which are properties of a true Basic Income.

      Means testing requires am expensive beaucracy and a pyramid of people administrating it. Those overhead costs cost more tham just giving everyone the same amount.

      • floridaman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Literature on the topic suggests otherwise. I said earlier I’ve debated on this topic and so I know what I’m talking about to an extent. According to David A. Green et al. In 2021 from the Vancouver school of Economics, “[…] there are also many alternative designs. The alternatives can be viewed from two perspectives, related to placing conditions on the payments. The first type of conditionality is related to whether the basic income applies to everyone […] or to a specific group of people.” In the end the definition of basic income doesn’t come down to economic theory but what we can agree on, and by saying MT ‘is not basic income’ doesn’t help to implement any kind of BI.

        Source here

        • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The basic principle of basic income is that is applied to everyone equally.

          Otherwise it is a negative tax or welfare payment. Which are different and have different effects on the recipients.

          Applying to everyone does 2 key things: it removes administrative overhead costs and removes any stigma from recieving it that lead to exploitation, hate, and division of society.

          Edit to address your other comment: Implementing a system flawed at the foundation, just so it fails or falls into a welfare like quagmire, is disingenuous and perpetuating the failures of the past.

          Id rather not sabotage the solution with overhead and politics invested in keeping people broke.

          • floridaman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            administrative overhead costs

            The fundamental component of the Institute on Race and Political Economy’s plan is expanding the EITC, or Earned Income Tax Credit, an already existent program. Implementing MTBI through the EITC doesn’t increase costs anymore than a UBI would as the internal infrastructure already exists in the IRS. If you were to implement a UBI without the EITC, you’d either have to create an entirely new program through the Treasury Department or otherwise, and be able to find every person in the US to pay them with cash or cheque. That doesn’t sound like more administrative overhead? Maybe I’m biased because I particularly like the idea of an MTBI but just the implementation of a UBI sounds more of a practical nightmare than MT.

            any stigma from receiving it

            Cremer & Roeder, '15 suggest that a means tested system will have comparable stigma to other existing programs such as SNAP, which is high, but in the US political climate, there will be more support for a means tested system, and “political economy considerations do not appear to justify a universal system.” Although there is still a stigma associated, the net benefit of having political backing that’s miles ahead of a UBI makes it a much more realistic plan to pass in current day.

            flawed at the foundation

            I have given examples in other comments showing that MT works, mainly the Stockton trial, but I’m more than happy to provide empirical studies from other countries implementing MT on a larger scale.

            • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Earned Income Tax Credit

              This is not basic income. It is a tax credit.

              Basoc income is a monthly payment. It helps pay the bills. The payments can be relied upon.

              Tax Credits never pay the bills. They arrive (maybe) once a year. Canmot relt on the ammount or if it will come at all.

              Tax credits help wealthy people they do not help poor people struggling to make it month to month.

              RE: administrative costs Adding to the IRS workload drives up costs.

              Just issue a UBI to every living SSN. Distribute via electronic transfer. Almost free overhead. Simple. Done.

              Means testing is wasteful.

    • doc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      How does this prevent the welfare trap, where working more has a lesser impact on revenue as welfare goes down? This seems to have the exact same issues as the current system.