• BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hard agree on all points. It’s a bit of a bummer that Andrew yang of all people was the one to start the national conversation about UBI because his whole deal just pollutes the discussion from the jump

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It did at least introduce the concept to a lot of people, especially to those who have otherwise never have heard of it.

      Kind of like what Bernard Sandman did. He introduced people to a bastardized version of socialism but that still got people talking.

    • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also for a guy with a Math pin he ignored key parts of the UBI research he used for his position and repeatedly misrepresented the figures in it.

      The projection that the economy would grow because of UBI was in the part of the Roosevelt Institute study that posited the money would just appear from the sky whereas the growth rates projected from tax financed UBI were almost zero as would be expected.