Andrew Yang Policy on THE FREEDOM DIVIDEND

[Sherman A1]

Andrew would implement a Universal Basic Income, ‘the Freedom Dividend,’ of $1,000/month, $12,000 a year for every American adult over the age of 18. This is independent of one’s work status or any other factor. This would enable all Americans to pay their bills, educate themselves, start businesses, be more creative, stay healthy, relocate for work, spend time with their children, take care of loved ones, and have a real stake in the future.

Any change to the Freedom Dividend would require a constitutional amendment.

It will be illegal to lend or borrow against one’s Dividend.If one does not graduate from high school, your dividend does not begin until 20.

A Universal Basic Income at this level would permanently grow the economy by 12.56 to 13.10 percent—or about $2.5 trillion by 2025—and it would increase the labor force by 4.5 to 4.7 million people. Putting money into people’s hands and keeping it there would be a perpetual boost and support to job growth and the economy.

https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/

[PoliticAverse]

1. "Any change to the Freedom Dividend would require a constitutional amendment."

Unless the "freedom dividend" itself were passed as a constitutional amendment anything one congress passes can be undone by another congress.

[Blue_true]

2. I believe in UBI. It will be needed to stabilize society.

But I also believe that a UBI system should incentivize work, even if that work is doing charity work without pay. We should not have a system where able-bodied people can stay at home knowing that money will be coming in. I know some will be upset with this view, I am ok with that.

[Sherman A1]

3. I have never heard him indicate it would be anything

Less than what you mention. Nobody can realistically get by on $12k per year. This is a supplement or dividend not a sit on your backside and play video games life income.

[Blue_true]

4. As a dividend it will dramatically improve society. Thanks. nt

[crazytown]

5. Money that could be spent on Infrastructure, College, Medicaid,

Prisoner Rehabilitation and Child Care.

[Sherman A1]

8. I see no proposal that would cut into this needs

and I see only expansion of in those areas from what I have heard in his interviews and speeches. If you have information that indicates he will be cutting them please provide links and support to your statement.

[crazytown]

9. As far as I know Andrew Yang is not proposing any cuts

What I am talking about is the opportunity cost - new spending in other areas forgone in choosing to devote $2-3 trillion to the UBI.

It’s not an answer to say, the cost in can be recovered by other taxation. The revenue from those taxes could be devoted to spending in other areas as well.

my view is the investment in infrastructure needed to repair and rebuild America cannot be put off any longer. Trump is talking about $2trillion. That is only the starting point.

The vast bulk of the UBI will go into discretionary spendung and paying off debt. At this time, America needs to invest. At the end of the day it’s about priorities.

[Sherman A1]

10. REBUILD AMERICAN INFRASTRUCTURE

https://www.yang2020.com/policies/rebuild-america/

America’s infrastructure is showing its age. Roads are cracking, bridges are becoming less stable, our schools are aging and our ports can’t accept the new, larger boats that are made possible by the expansion of the Panama Canal.

Not only are these degradations a danger to Americans, but they’re costing this country money and jobs. By some estimates, our infrastructure problems could cost us as much as $1 trillion per year and 3.5 million jobs. Every time you’re stuck in traffic is lost time.

We need to immediately invest in infrastructure. Not only can we avoid the negative repercussions, but we can create up to 15 million jobs over a ten-year period. The Federal Reserve and IMF both estimate that every dollar spent on infrastructure earns $1.5-$3 back. And we’ll decrease deaths related to the poor condition of our roads and bridges.

We can also use this opportunity to modernize our infrastructure, including power plants, sewer, and water systems, and public transportation systems. We can look to invest in a nationwide fiber-optic network. We can also use this rebuild to experiment with innovative new technologies, such as solar-cell roadways, used to generate free electricity for the surrounding communities.

"Our infrastructure is a dangerous embarrassment and a symbol of how weak our state has become. We are still living off of the investments of past generations in the 1960s. We need to own the future, which includes building a world-class infrastructure befitting the world’s most advanced society in 2020. When our infrastructure works better we’ll all work better. This will also help put millions of Americans back to work and demonstrate that America can yet build great things."

[crazytown]

11. Yang is absolutely right.

Where I disagree with him is devoting $2-3 trillion to discretionary consumer spending via the UBI.

I can see both sides. Above all UBI would assist the poorest, the destitute and the homeless. The people who have no voice. The children going to bed hungry, that Bernie talks about. They suffer in silence. The people down south living in shacks. Poverty isn’t sexy like a shiny new bridge. Yang stands head and shoulders above phonys like John Edwards.

[namahage]

6. And how would this be paid for?

He does not seem to go into that detail here. It takes some digging to find out how:

https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-ubi/

Andrew proposes funding UBI by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value-Added Tax (VAT) of 10%. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally – most would prefer cash with no restriction.

So basically, he's going to cut welfare and institute another regressive tax that impacts lower-income people more?

[Sherman A1]

7. As proposed the VAT would be lower than other Western Countries

and is designed to capture taxes from Tech transactions that currently go untaxed. Yes, Social programs would be affected by offsetting the Freedom Dividend. So if your received $1500 per month in benefits from Program X you would receive the $1K Freedom Dividend and then $500.OO from Program X for no net gain, but also no net loss. I don't see that as a problem as those who currently receive benefits would not be losing anything.

If your candidate has a better idea to both capture taxes from Tech and to offset the coming job losses from AI please let us know what they might be so that we might all be informed.

[crazytown]

12. The VAT may bring in less than expected.

In EU countries business can deduct tax paid on inputs. If State sales tax can be deducted from VAT, the revenue is compromised. If not, you have a tax on a tax.

[Sherman A1]

13. It really depends on how it is structured

Just like everything else proposed by him or any candidate of any party. The devil is always in the details. That said I would prefer to at least give this long consideration.

[crazytown]

14. As I said above

The UBI reaches poverty in a way no other policy can manage.

[WeekiWater]

15. I didn't know he thought the vehicle to achieve this is a constitutional amendment.

On one hand, it’s the only way to solidify it. On the other hand, it makes it a complete impossibility, even in the decades ahead.