[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Taler] Taler and UBI

From: Martin Schanzenbach
Subject: Re: [Taler] Taler and UBI
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 07:52:44 +0000

On 14.10.2022 10:04, Sebastian Javier Marchano wrote:
> Not UBI is implemented in the same way, but what you can expect from an UBI
> is:
>  * prevent accumulation of capital: denomination that daily/weekly expires.
> If the person didn't use the money, it is lost. Since this kind of money
> it's intended to be used for basic needs (like transport or food) this may
> not be bad. Note: it's lost from the person perspective, from the bank
> perspective it is saved.
>  * prevent spending UBI money on other products/services that are not basic
> need: implement as the age protocol.

I do not think that any of this is or should be expected. One of the
major arguments for the UBI is that it reduces beaurocratic overhead
because there are no means tests or restrictions on its use.
If you include that then, yes, you will have to solve both the
beaurocratic overhead (again) and your technological problem.
In fact, you could argue that this quickly degenerates into what, for
example, Germany currently already has: You usually get rent paid by the
state plus some pocket money (depending on your city amounting to up to
2k Euros) in exchange for "draconic" restrictions.
But again, your premise is flawed I think. This is bikeshedding.

I would also consider that UBI concepts are deeply flawed with respect
to psychological aspects. Negative income tax, for example, can be seen
as a form of UBI that solves some of those. But it requires you
to submit tax forms... so it hat little to do with Taler.
The tax "refund" you get, then, is also usually not bound to any restrictions 
what you
can do with it (and IMHO, it shouldn't).


> --
> Sebastian
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 at 07:04, Martin Schanzenbach <mschanzenbach@posteo.de>
> wrote:
> > i think you are conflating things. If you wanted more privacy for ubi
> > receivers, you could allow citizens to register with number accounts. this
> > does not strike me as a wallet issue at all that is unique to ubi.
> > regarding the large amount in the wallet potentially lost: what kind of
> > utopian ubi is that which not only covers your monthly expenses partially
> > but accumulates into savings?
> >
> > Am 14. Oktober 2022 18:50:48 GMT+09:00 schrieb "Özgür Kesim" <
> > oec-taler@kesim.org>:
> >>
> >> Thus spake Martin Schanzenbach (mschanzenbach@posteo.de):
> >>
> >> i struggle to understand what spending coins has to do with ubi. ubi is 
> >> the concept of receiving funds by the state to your account, not wallet.
> >>> once the funds are in your account, you can taler away all day.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Correct, if bank accounts are to receive the income.
> >>
> >> But we were considering the hypothetical case in which a KYC'ed Taler
> >> wallet could play the role of an individual account to receive somewhat
> >> larger amounts (such as UBI).
> >>
> >> Not sure that is something Taler would want to promote, but _if_ it
> >> does, the loss of the wallet could be catastrophic to the individual.
> >>
> >>   oec
> >>
> >> --
> > Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
> >

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]