and I've read that it's something the British Labour Party is looking into. If automation is going to eliminate 75 million American jobs in 20 years, isn't UBI something we should be looking into?

Either would be helpful. That we allow people to starve in this country is a travesty!

I suppose you think there are thousands if not millions of women getting pregnant in order to increase the size of their welfare checks. Or maybe eugenics makes sense to you? A lot of "progressives" thought they were being humanitarians when they supported serilizing people with disabilities, poor people, and especially people of color involuntarily. Other progressives believe they are being helpful when they buy into RW frames and offer condescending "solutions" to invented media friendly narrative that demonizes poor women.

you are WAY out of line.

Or, maybe they are working 2 jobs and still living in poverty while their kids suffer when they don't get help with their homework, etc. Family planning has absolutely nothing to do with improving the 3% unemployment 19% poverty reality for families with existing children.

it's a stereotype.

I notice that your screen name is Loyal Sister. How many sisters do you have? I have two, one that I like
and one that I don't. lol

Minimum income....
The Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is a government ensured guarantee that no one's income will fall below the level necessary to meet their most basic needs for any reason. As Bertrand Russell put it in 1918, "A certain small income, sufficient for necessities, should be secured for all, whether they work or not, and that a larger income should be given to those who are willing to engage in some work which the community recognizes as useful. On this basis we may build further." Thus, with BIG no one is destitute but everyone has the positive incentive to work. BIG is an efficient, effective, and equitable solution to poverty that promotes individual freedom and leaves the beneficial aspects of a market economy in place.

The term BIG is more specific than terms like income maintenance or income support, which refer to any kind of program designed to aid those with lower incomes. The Basic Income Guarantee differs from existing income maintenance programs in the United States and Canada in that it is both universal and has no work requirement. It is therefore, very simple and easy to administer. It helps the working poor, single parents, and the homeless, without placing anyone under the supervision of a caseworker.
http://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.php

In addition...wasn't Mr. Russell an ardent Socialist? We all know how that has worked out in the past.

I see two problems aside from the ongoing and growing cost.

1. It would make the lower class permanent as kids growing up in a family where no one has ever worked and everyone waits for a check each month. It will be near impossible for kids in that family to break that cycle. It would doom millions of kids to a life of hanging out and just getting by. The social problems that would come with that we already know.

2. Workers in lower paid jobs would be tempted to quit. Why work for $ 8 an hour when my brother plays video games all day and gets $ 7.25 from his government check. Just screw it.

There are bad ideas and bad ideas, but boy is this a bad idea.

So many concessions are given to corporations in order to attract them to communities without evaluating the long term costs. Wal-Mart is a favorite target in this but too often corporations are given tax breaks or favorable zoning changes to allow them to build in areas that do not really want them which often lowers the proper values immediately around the mega-stores.

No requirements are made that the corporations pay their workers enough that the community will not be burdened with additional welfare, food and housing subsidy costs. In addition the large corporate stores drive the local companies out of business and take the profits out of the area.

This creates a triple hit - not only are the real estate taxes lower, average local income is less, and the local community is not having the profits reinvested locally.

Communities need to take these factors into account when corporations from outside come in and ask for concessions. If a community does as Washington DC tried to and requires that the corporations pay higher hourly rates, provide full time employment with benefits, pay their full share of local taxes, then more of the corporate profits would be reinvested into the communities rather than being removed.