• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

U'd like $400/mo. UBI w/Medicare 4all coverage?

Do you favor $400/mo.Universal Basic Income (UBI) w/Medicare 4all coverage?

  • Yes: I'd favor $400/mo. UBI w/Medicare 4all as proposed.

    Votes: 3 50.0%
  • No: I'd oppose $400/mo. UBI w/Medicare 4all as proposed.

    Votes: 3 50.0%

  • Total voters
    6

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
I'd favor a $400 monthly universal income benefit ( U.B.I. ) for all legal adult ( over age 18 ) U.S. citizens and universal Medicare Part A for every American citizen ( with $2,500 annual deductible per person ) inpatient hospital medical insurance coverage, which would replace targeted welfare benefits to particularly needy welfare recipients.

The amount of Universal Medicare Part A coverage would be the approximately $1 trillion a year that'd cover the total hospital medical care expenses in the United States.

Reference: Fast Facts on U.S. Hospitals, 2019 | AHA

Medicare payroll taxes currently would cover about $300 billion of this expense.

Reference: What is the Medicare trust fund, and how is it financed?

I believe about 30 percent of Medicaid spending is for hospitalization; the replacement of this Medicaid spending would cover about $165 billion of my proposed Medicare Part A for all.

**The $2,500 deductible and co-pays applied to each of the 34 million persons administered to hospitals on average each year would reduce coverage expenses by $85 billion annually.**...
**Edited to include this costs savings to taxpayers that'd been left out of original post**

Reference: Total Number of Medicare Beneficiaries

**So now we'd have a $450 billion shortfall that'd I propose be paid for by the following modest tax hikes** ... **Edited amount of shortfall from $520 billion to $450 billion** :
Increasing the top marginal federal income tax rate from 37% to 43% along with increasing the second highest top marginal federal income tax rate from 35% to 38%, an increase of the corporate tax rate from 21% to 25%, an additional 50 cent/gallon fuel excise tax, an additional 50 cent tobacco excise tax on each pack of cigarettes, a 50 percent increase of excise taxes on adult beverage alcohol content, a doubling of federal excise taxes on air travelers and national park visitors, and the reduction of the exemption on the federal estate tax from $10 million to $5 million.

I'll add to my UBI benefit proposal, that'd allow any legal U.S. resident to buy into Medicare Part B ( with a $5,000 annual deductible ) coverage at a $100/mo minimum monthly premium plus 10 percent of his/her most recent reported annual **adjusted taxable income** ... ** edited from taxable adjusted gross income**, with a maximum monthly premium paid at $400/month. Medicare Part B premiums paid by a parent for Medicare Part B health insurance coverage of his/her child would most likely cost $100/month.

My proposed Medicare Part B ( with $5,000 annual deductible per person ) buy-in option would not be mandatory; it'd be optional for those who couldn't find affordable health insurance for his/her child or for himself/herself through his/her employer or on the private market.

The price tax now for my now proposed $400 per month universal basic income ( U.B.I ) benefit program is approximately $1.1 trillion annually: $400 billion of this could be paid for by the total elimination of federal spending on medicaid., $127 billion elimination of spending on food stamps and agricultural subsidies. $112 billion on the elimination of federalized spending on education, $41 billion elimination of urban housing and development spending, elimination of $33 billion of federal spending on unemployment compensation, $60 billion reduction of social security disability payments, $100 billion reduction on Senior medicare spending with increased Medicare part B deductible, $3 billion elimination of renewable energy tax credits, $13 billion reduction in foreign aid spending, $65 billion elimination of military spending by way of ending the overseas contingency operations fund, and a modest 4 percent national sales tax on new vehicles.

Reference: A Plan to Cut Federal Government Spending

Reference: US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Who wouldn't want a UBI? *Grin*

The catch is if something like that can be sustainable looking ahead long term in any market-based economy.

I do think in light of encroaching automation and displacement something has to be done.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I'd favor a $400 monthly universal income benefit ( U.B.I. ) for all legal adult ( over age 18 ) U.S. citizens and universal Medicare Part A for every American citizen ( with $2,500 annual deductible per person ) inpatient hospital medical insurance coverage, which would replace targeted welfare benefits to particularly needy welfare recipients.

The price tag for Universal Medicare Part A coverage would be the approximately $1 trillion a year that'd cover the total hospital medical care expenses in the United States.

Reference: Fast Facts on U.S. Hospitals, 2019 | AHA

Reference: What is the Medicare trust fund, and how is it financed?

Medicare payroll taxes currently would cover about $300 billion of this expense.

Reference: What is the Medicare trust fund, and how is it financed?

A $1,200 increase in the Medicare A deductible for Seniors would cover $15 billion of this expense.

Reference: 2019 Medicare Parts A & B Premiums and Deductibles | CMS

Reference: Total Number of Medicare Beneficiaries

I believe about 30 percent of Medicaid spending is for hospitalization; the replacement of this Medicaid spending would cover about $165 billion of my proposed Medicare Part A for all.

So now we'd have a $520 billion shortfall that'd I propose be paid for by the following modest tax hikes :
Increasing the top marginal federal income tax rate from 37% to 43% along with increasing the second highest top marginal federal income tax rate from 35% to 38%, an increase of the corporate tax rate from 21% to 25%, an additional 50 cent/gallon fuel excise tax, an additional 50 cent tobacco excise tax on each pack of cigarettes, a 50 percent increase of excise taxes on adult beverage alcohol content, a doubling of federal excise taxes on air travelers and national park visitors, and the reduction of the exemption on the federal estate tax from $10 million to $5 million.

I'll add to my UBI benefit proposal, that'd allow any legal U.S. resident to buy into Medicare Part B ( with a $5,000 annual deductible ) coverage at a $100/mo minimum monthly premium plus 10 percent of his/her most recent reported annual taxable adjusted gross income, with a maximum monthly premium paid at $400/month. Medicare Part B premiums paid by a parent for Medicare Part B health insurance coverage of his/her child would most likely cost $100/month.

My proposed Medicare Part B ( with $5,000 annual deductible per person ) buy-in option would not be mandatory; it'd be optional for those who couldn't find affordable health insurance for his/her child or for himself/herself through his/her employer or on the private market. ....:)

The price tax now for my now proposed $400 per month universal basic income ( U.B.I ) benefit program is approximately $1.1 trillion annually: $400 billion of this could be paid for by the total elimination of federal spending on medicaid., $127 billion elimination of spending on food stamps and agricultural subsidies. $112 billion on the elimination of federalized spending on education, $41 billion elimination of urban housing and development spending, elimination of $33 billion of federal spending on unemployment compensation, $60 billion reduction of social security disability payments, $100 billion reduction on Senior medicare spending with increased Medicare part B deductible, $3 billion elimination of renewable energy tax credits, $13 billion reduction in foreign aid spending, $65 billion elimination of military spending by way of ending the overseas contingency operations fund, and a modest 4 percent national sales tax on new vehicles.

Reference: A Plan to Cut Federal Government Spending

Reference: US Federal Spending Analysis - Charts Tables History

I am not sure if this post was in response to what I asked for regarding costs. Even if it isn't I will take a look as you are providing numbers from the existing system for comparison.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Why would you want the government to have that much control over you?

Based on my proposed tax hikes, only if your annual taxable personal income puts you in the highest marginal tax bracket, would you certainly pay more in taxes than what you'd receive from your universal income benefit and taxpayer provided hospital insurance medical coverage.

UBI would reduce a huge array of costly social welfare services like health care, housing, food assistance, and unemployment support by providing a simple, inexpensive way to let individuals, rather than the government, determine how money is spent.

Unlike with the current welfare system, the universal basic income benefit requires neither any means testing nor income verification of its recipients; basically, this benefit is paid back by those in a high income tax bracket, who don't need any welfare from the government.

Unlike welfare benefits provided with the current system, benefits from a universal basic income aren't diminished by earned income. So then, this wouldn't deter anybody from working as does the current welfare system.

Universal basic universal income would enable any few people to live together as roommates in safe modest housing accommodations away from high crime locations.

When you factor in housing, utilities, food and medical care, the current welfare system provides more financial benefits to its recipients than does minimum wage paying jobs to their recipients. Whereas, with universal basic income benefits, everybody starts off receiving the same amount of welfare benefits as anybody else. With the elimination of the welfare class by way of the universal basic income benefit, there'd be no resentment between the working class and those who don't work.

The UBI would help people out such as housewives who aren't entitled to unemployment benefits; the UBI empowers everybody.

My UBI benefit program as proposed would eliminate the U.S. Department of Education, Urban Housing and Development, and 90 percent of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. UBI benefits could be administered by the already existing department of Social Security. My proposed UBI benefit would eliminate 20,000 bureaucrats. If each bureaucrat on average costs taxpayers, $50,000/year, that'd alone save one billion dollars annually.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
A UBI benefit would actually reduce government beauracracy in comparison to the status quo.

This misses the point. It is about giving power to government to solve a problem. It is not the costs but the power transferred from the citizen to the state.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Why would you want the government to have that much control over you?

The amount of government control that government would have over most people with my proposed UBI benefit program and Universal Medicare Part A coverage would actually pale in comparison to the amount of control that the government would have if most any Democrat were in charge of our nation.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
This misses the point. It is about giving power to government to solve a problem. It is not the costs but the power transferred from the citizen to the state.

Yes...states would lose federal funding for education, unemployment compensation, housing and urban development, and food stamp funds, but they would have $4,800 of additional income per adult resident they could tax based upon my proposed U.B.I. benefit.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Yes...states would lose federal funding for education, unemployment compensation, housing and urban development, and food stamp funds, but they would have $4,800 of additional income per adult resident they could tax based upon my proposed U.B.I. benefit.

Not everyone is willing to trade that power for a reduced cost of stuff. Especially if they do not feel they need your programs or cost savings.

“He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” BF
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
A UBI benefit would actually reduce government beauracracy in comparison to the status quo.
In my view, there is absolutely NOTHING that would reduce government bureaucracy if you keep giving them more power over one's life like giving free money, free food, free phones, free education, free... etc etc etc.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Who wouldn't want a UBI? *Grin*

The catch is if something like that can be sustainable looking ahead long term in any market-based economy.

I do think in light of encroaching automation and displacement something has to be done.

Because UBI comes with Universal Increased Taxes, so are you ready for your taxes to go up $400+ a month to pay for someone else? :D The lowest tiers of taxes would probably pay nothing into it, the middle class would have to pay double what they take to cover them, and the rich probably would have to pay 4x this amount for the system to be able to survive. There is no other way that this could work... The money doesn't materialize out of the thin air.

Automation doesn't eliminate jobs completely it just changes the available jobs into jobs related to supporting those systems. There is a short-term loss, but in the long term jobs related to that field -- programming, robotics, automation, mechanics, and so on get create more opportunities with better pay.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Because UBI comes with Universal Increased Taxes, so are you ready for your taxes to go up $400+ a month to pay for someone else? :D The lowest tiers of taxes would probably pay nothing into it, the middle class would have to pay double what they take to cover them, and the rich probably would have to pay 4x this amount for the system to be able to survive. There is no other way that this could work... The money doesn't materialize out of the thin air.

Automation doesn't eliminate jobs completely it just changes the available jobs into jobs related to supporting those systems. There is a short-term loss, but in the long term jobs related to that field -- programming, robotics, automation, mechanics, and so on get create more opportunities with better pay.
Because UBI comes with Universal Increased Taxes, so are you ready for your taxes to go up $400+ a month to pay for someone else? :D The lowest tiers of taxes would probably pay nothing into it, the middle class would have to pay double what they take to cover them, and the rich probably would have to pay 4x this amount for the system to be able to survive. There is no other way that this could work... The money doesn't materialize out of the thin air.

Automation doesn't eliminate jobs completely it just changes the available jobs into jobs related to supporting those systems. There is a short-term loss, but in the long term jobs related to that field -- programming, robotics, automation, mechanics, and so on get create more opportunities with better pay.

Oh yeah, I forget to mention my proposed UBI benefit would be exempt from federal income taxes, ... :)

Unfortunately, however this UBI benefit could be subjected to state and local taxes. ...:(
 
Last edited:

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
For one thing, $400 is not sufficient.

But, that aside, it’s a move in the right direction.

Regardless of how the people spend the money (which they would do), the money would at least stimulate the economy and provide jobs. Much more so than giving trillions to billionaires to stash away, with the false hope that it would trickle down.

The decades following WW2 were some of the most prosperous for the largest percentage of the population, and taxes were far far higher than they are today. Mr. trickledown sold the country a load of manure, and the state of the economy shows it.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
This misses the point. It is about giving power to government to solve a problem. It is not the costs but the power transferred from the citizen to the state.

Why doesn't the rest if the developed world adopt the U.S. system if it's superior?
 
Top