only if you put on the same blinders that the author does, and ignore things such as:
- no mention whatsoever of any existential threats e.g. climate change. full faith and credit in Mr. Market to get us out of that rut, i guess
- some definitions of "efficient" involve avoiding policies in one country (say worker and environmental protections) by moving to other countries where those same protections don't apply. so efficient seems to also mean unlawful, to some extent
- we'll trust these UBI recipients to "do the right thing" and goose up the economy immediately, instead of say, investing in infrastructure (education, health, science) that we know is a far better investment in the long term future of the country (but can't really be done by a couple grand per month, more like... i dunno... a government thing)
By making sure each person has their minimum needs met, one can then have a better chance at having support for solving big problems that require government which requires popular support.
There are schemes for UBI which don't actually cost much more than we are spending. It can just be reallocation with more clawback in taxes. If one wants to.
- no mention whatsoever of any existential threats e.g. climate change. full faith and credit in Mr. Market to get us out of that rut, i guess
- some definitions of "efficient" involve avoiding policies in one country (say worker and environmental protections) by moving to other countries where those same protections don't apply. so efficient seems to also mean unlawful, to some extent
- we'll trust these UBI recipients to "do the right thing" and goose up the economy immediately, instead of say, investing in infrastructure (education, health, science) that we know is a far better investment in the long term future of the country (but can't really be done by a couple grand per month, more like... i dunno... a government thing)