• Bonehead
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Just because you’re hung up on the name is no reason not to move forward with it.

        • Bonehead
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Just call it something else. It’s not UBI.

          That’s what it seems that you’re arguing. But as I said, “universal” can mean whatever we want. Let’s just give poor people money so they can survive a little better and not worry about what the exact connotations the name might imply.

          • @chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            UBI describes the policy I strongly support. The policy you support, I am on the fence about, and lean slightly against, for various reasons. It sounds like you, inversely, are pro means tested basic income, and anti universal basic income. Let’s allow people to make up their minds about these policies based on the facts and not anything resembling a semantic bait and switch.

            • Bonehead
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              However 88 billion (the cost estimate in the OP article) divided by the population of canada is 2200

              By your own admission, your version of UBI wouldn’t be viable. You accuse me of a semantic bait and switch while misrepresenting the program the government is trying to implement.