Global Ethics Forum: The Case for Universal Basic Income, with Andrew Yang
Articles,  Blog

Global Ethics Forum: The Case for Universal Basic Income, with Andrew Yang

(upbeat music) – Welcome to Ethics Matter. I’m Stephanie Sy. Our guest here in the
Carnegie Council Studio is Andrew Yang. He is an entrepreneur
and the founder of Venture for America, a fellowship program
that’s given young entrepreneurs the
opportunity to start businesses and create
jobs in American cities. He’s also an author, and his
most recent book is called The War on Normal People: The Truth About America’s
Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic
Income Is Our Future. It is jobs that Andrew
Yang clearly cares about. Andrew, thank you
first of all, so much, for being here. The reason you have written
this book about universal basic income is because
you worry about automation. When I read about you, a lot
of times it was associated with this concern that there
would be some sort of robot apocalypse, so let’s
start there first. Are you worried that robots
are going to take over? – I am, but it’s not
like walking robots are going to come in and replace
you and me in the studio. It’s actually the case that
robots started arriving in the American economy around
2000 and started displacing large numbers of
manufacturing workers from then until now. If you look at the numbers,
American manufacturing workers went down from about
17 million to 12 million between 2000 and 2015. Of those five million jobs
lost, the vast majority, 80% were due to
robots and automation. It’s not that robots
are on the horizon, they’ve actually been
here for a while. The reason why I’m so
passionate about this is I spent the last six years
in Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Baltimore, and
other cities that have really experienced the
throes of automation over the past couple of decades. I worked with hundreds
of entrepreneurs in these regions trying to
create new jobs, and I learned a number of
things over those years. One was the impact of
automation on these communities. It’s been very, very negative. You can see very large
numbers of distressed people in these communities that
haven’t found new opportunities. The businesses that are
coming up typically do not employ large numbers of
high school graduates. They employ smaller numbers
of engineers and college graduates very typically. – It’s the blue-collar
workers that have suffered. We have been hearing,
definitely in this last election cycle, that
that’s globalization, that’s bad trade deals. But you’re saying that, based
on the statistics you’ve seen, 80% of manufacturing
jobs in 2000 were actually lost
to automation. – Automation’s a much bigger
driver of job displacement than globalization and
certainly immigrants. That’s something the
American people, I believe, are coming around to. There was a recent
survey that showed 70% of Americans believe that
technology, AI, software, and all of these things are
going to eliminate many more jobs than they are going
to create over the next 10 years, which is 100% correct. They’re right. We’re waking up to the reality. We’re right now on the
third or fourth inning of the greatest technological
and economic shift that we’ve ever experienced as a society. It’s the greatest
shift in human history. – That shift, though, again
I take it back to the time horizon starting from the
Industrial Revolution but really in earnest in the
’60s and ’70s with machines replacing workers on
the assembly line. What is different
about this time that calls for
drastic solutions? Is it AI and machine learning? – Part of it and one of the
reasons I’m so passionate about this is that if
you start digging into the numbers, you see
that we are in the midst of this process and
that our society is not dealing
with it very well. You see these
misleading numbers about the unemployment rate
in the headline saying it’s 4.2%, it’s
near-full employment. Near-full employment,
not full-on employment. Then you think, things must
be good in the labor market. What that’s masking is
that our labor force participation rate is
down to a multi-decade low of around 62.9%, which is
comparable to the rates in El Salvador and the
Dominican Republic, much lower than it has
been in past periods. Ninety-five million
Americans are out of the workforce and
aren’t considered as part of the unemployment rate,
including almost one out of five in their prime working
age of 25 to 34. There’s a lot of weakness
that our headlines are not digging into, and a
lot of that is driven by this progression. When people talk about
the Industrial Revolution, I honestly get a little
bit frustrated because it was a different transition. It was much less dramatic. It didn’t affect
as many industries. If you look at it, there
were actually widespread protests and
problems that arose. Labor unions came into
existence around 1886 in response to the
early industrialization. – There was real
social instability. Are you concerned about
social instability becoming an issue with automation, or
do you think that is happening? – If you look at the numbers, it’s definitely happening. The suicide rate among
middle-aged white Americans has surged to
unprecedented levels. Our life expectancy as
a society has declined for two straight years. – There’s the opioid crisis. – Seven Americans die of
opioid overdoses every hour. The social disintegration
is already clear. It’s just we’re not paying
attention to it because our government, instead of
putting up measurements that we can all understand,
like life expectancy declining-that’s
shocking and terrible in a developed country. That’s actually
almost unprecedented. How is this happening? Why? Automation has been tearing
its way through the economy and society already, and we
are coming apart at the seams. Donald Trump in my opinion
is president today because we automated away millions
of manufacturing jobs in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, which were essentially the
swing states he needed to win. – But you don’t hear of
Trump talking about that. There’s a lot more focus. Why do you think there is
less political engagement on this issue? By the way, I forgot to
mention that you have announced your candidacy
for president in 2020. Why do you think there
hasn’t been more political engagement on this issue? I don’t know of any other
candidate that’s made universal basic income,
which by the way we’re going to get to, his platform. – Well, one of the reasons
I’m running for president is that leading up to this-I’m
the CEO of Venture for America. My organization has helped
create thousands of jobs, so I’m meeting with
senators, and governors, the president, and other people. With a couple of them,
I would say to them, “According to what I’m seeing, “we are automating
away millions of jobs, “and it’s about to get
much, much worse very fast.” I have dozens of friends
in Silicon Valley, and they will tell you in
private that what they are doing is going to get
rid of many, many jobs. – I mean Mark Zuckerberg
and Elon Musk, they’ve actually come
out in favor of– – Universal basic income.
– some sort of universal basic income because they know. – They do know. If you put them on a
panel, they might say, “Some jobs will be created,
some will be destroyed,” but they know that the
focus of their activities is trying to save
companies money. Most of the time that means
taking an activity that humans are doing
and automating it. The example that I talked
about in The New York Times was truck driving. The incentives to
automate truck driving are $168 billion per year. That’s why we have
the smartest people in the country working on
it because they know there’s a giant pot of gold. That’s the way our system works. I saw that this was happening, and I would talk to
these government leaders. I would say, hey guys, this
seems to be the main problem. It’s driving all of
these other issues. What are we going
to do about that? I literally had
politicians say to me, “We cannot talk about that.” The reason why they cannot talk about it is because the
solutions are too dramatic, and it makes them seem
extreme and alarmist. What they’ll do is
they’ll talk about education and re-training. They will say, “We need to
re-train American workers “for the jobs of the
future,” which sounds great. – Where are the jobs
going to come from? – Exactly. Well part of it too is
if you dig into my book The War on Normal
People talks about this. If you dig into the data
on the success rates of government
re-training programs, they’re essentially
entirely ineffective; there’s almost no difference
in outcome between a re-training group and
a not-re-trained group. Another study had the
efficacy rate at about 37%, which in some of those, 37% might have succeeded
without the program. This is in instances when
the government is spending thousands of dollars trying
to re-train the worker, which is not going to be
the case most of the time. Because one in 10
Americans works in retail, 30% of the malls
are going to close, and it’s not like
when a mall closes, there will be government
re-trainers around saying, “Hey you just lost your job.” Most Americans are not
going to go through government-financed retraining. Even when it is offered,
it doesn’t work. – Before we get into the
details of your universal basic income plan, one
issue that I see right away with it, in other words
giving people a monthly income without conditions is it
doesn’t seem to address the problem you’re describing
in the large, broader sense, which is there are going to
be fewer jobs for humans. How does it address an
evolving economy where the top five companies
in the world by market capitalization are all tech
companies that don’t hire nearly the number of workers
that AT&T did in the 1960s when it was the largest company? How does this really
address an evolving economy? Or do you just have a
society where people don’t work and it’s sort of a
Robin Hood economy in some ways where you sort of take
and tax big tech that’s using automation and
redistribute to those that aren’t engineers and that
don’t get a piece of that pie? – This is where it
gets really deep, human, and philosophical. – Sorry. I got there a little earlier
than you probably expected. – No. I got there too. I was writing this book,
and I consider myself sort of like a
practical economist type but then you end up heading to the human and philosophical
very quickly because you realize, hey what should
people be doing if so using the truck drivers as an example, there are 3.5 million of them. Number-one job in 29 states;
94%, male; average age, 49. So you start imagining, okay. Let’s say we automate
significant numbers of those jobs in the next 10 years. What does the new
world look like? It can be shocking
and frightening. Because let’s say that
transition goes poorly, and then the ex-truckers
riot in large numbers and block highways
with their trucks, because a lot of them
own their trucks, which is another problem. The reason why our
politicians struggle so much with this is that
there is no quick fix. Universal basic income is a
huge part of the solution, but it’s only one facet of it. The great thing about
universal basic income is that it may allow us to
redefine work because right now, we have this model of
work that essentially is a subsistence model. You should work to survive. You must show up. We’ll pay you based upon
how much time you spend, and you’ll get enough, maybe. There are actually very
few great things about this entire technological shift,
but the one potential bright spot is that it may
allow us to redefine why we do what we do. My platform has a
few main components. Universal basic income is
one, but the second one, which is as important,
is that we need to change how we measure value. GDP did not exist
as a measurement until the Great Depression. Then things were going so
badly that the government was like, “We have to have
a measurement to see how “things are going and
then try to improve it.” that’s now a terrible
measurement for our society because with automation
and software, and robots, GDP can go to the moon
and more and more people can be completely excluded
from that and left behind. Instead of GDP, we should
be measuring things like childhood success
rates, mental health, freedom from substance abuse, engagement with work
broadly defined, proportion of elderly
in quality situations. – One might put environmental
quality in that. – Environmental sustainability. Journalism, because
not everyone’s here in New York working
for organizations that are still vibrant
journalistically. In small towns
around the country, there’s actually no– – We could have a whole
discussion just about that. What you’re describing is
what I have heard CEOs that I’ve interviewed describe
as a triple bottom line. It’s a version of that. It’s a different way to measure, but it’s really quite
radical, Andrew, what you’re suggesting. By introducing a
universal basic income, you’re really talking
about transforming society and transforming the
way culture views value. Where do you think we are
right now as a society in accepting that? I will say, what were
very academic discussions on the Carnegie Council stage about universal
basic income seem to have gotten more and
more in the mainstream. – Oh yeah.
– I mean are we getting there, and what’s propelling that? – I’m where I am because
I believe that this is inevitable and we
don’t have a choice. The sooner we get there, the
better off our society will be. If we go too late, it’s
actually catastrophic. If we go too early, that
just gives us more time to build the new institutions that
are necessary to complement and get us through
this transition. The truth is we are
the richest and most technologically advanced
society in human history, and we can easily afford $1,000 per American adult per month. – I’ve heard that would
be 10 to 12% of GDP. That’s expensive. – The great thing is that
every dollar goes into the hands of an
American consumer, and then the vast majority
is going to be spent and circulated
through the economy. – [Stephanie] It would
actually grow the economy, that’s the hope. – Well, the Roosevelt Institute
tried to model it out, and you probably saw this. They found that universal
basic income at $1,000 a month, which is what I’m
proposing in my campaign, which we’ve called
the Freedom Dividend, would grow the economy
by 4.6 million jobs. – $2.5 trillion by 2025.
– 2.5 trillion, yes! – I pulled the information
from the left-leaning Roosevelt Institution,
who is, to their credit, doing a lot of research
on how this will happen. – I want to say
it’s common sense that most Americans
are struggling. If they got $1,000 a month,
what are they going to do? They’re going to spend
it in their town, on their children, paying bills. You can imagine Walmart, AT&T, every major consumer
company, all of a sudden, their consumers would
have more to spend. That’s where the
money is going to go. It would clearly
grow the economy. I’ve worked with
hundreds of entrepreneurs around the country. Entrepreneurs have
their heads up and are trying to
solve problems. They are often not people
that are desperately trying to scramble to pay their
bills month to month. If we implemented a
universal basic income, it would be the
greatest catalyst for entrepreneurship and
creativity we have ever seen. They would create,
tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands
of new businesses. – Two questions, the
first being the downside, some have said, is just
human psychology is whether for a lot of people giving them
free money, $1,000 a month, would take away their
incentive to work. What’s your explanation
for how we wouldn’t end up in a society that would
be less productive and less innovative? – I consider myself
a facts-driven or
data-driven person. The data just does not show
a reduction in work hours when you have income support, either here in the U.S. or Canada or in the
developing world. In the U.S. when they
ran large-scale trials, a slight reduction in
work hours for two groups: Young mothers and teenagers
who stayed in school longer. So universal basic
income of $1,000 a month, it’s not enough to prosper. It’s enough to take the edge
off of your need to survive, but virtually no one is
going to look at that and say, “Oh, I’m all set.” – But let me ask you
the other, I think, really important question. In your plan, how
would you pay for this? – It’s actually much
more affordable than
most people think. The headline number
is about $2 trillion. Our economy is
about $19 trillion, so that seems like a lot. But if you dig into the numbers, you find that we’re spending
about $500 billion right now on income support in various
ways: In-Kind, food stamps, welfare, housing, Social
Security Disability. This would be overlapping,
so if someone’s receiving $700 in benefits right now,
then you go to them and say, “You can keep your
current benefits or go to “the Freedom Dividend to get
$1,000 a month free and clear.” – So they would have the option. – They would have the option. But, because we’re already
spending $500 billion, this thing is 25% paid for
before you even get started. So, the big problem we’re
facing as a society is that more and more work is
being done by machines, robots, AI, software. Income tax is a terribly
inefficient way of actually harvesting that
value for the public. If you look at it,
who are going to be the beneficiaries of this
transition to automation? It’s going to be large tech
companies who are excellent at not paying a lot of tax. – Very good at
offshore tax havens. – Yeah, they just move it over and say it all went
through Ireland. Small tech companies,
which often not profitable, and then if they
do get acquired, it’s maybe a one-time thing. They might have to pay
acquisition at a certain point, but even then it’s
at a capital gains rate. There’s just not a lot
of money that’s gonna be coming to the public even as
more and more work is going to be done by
robots and software. That’s what we need to change, and that’s the way we pay
for universal basic income. The way we pay for it is we
implement a value-added tax, which right now is in
practice in every other industrialized country in
the world except for us. And through a value added tax. So Amazon now it’s
43% of e-commerce, largest market cap. Jeff Bezos could be
the first trillionaire. There are periods when they say, “We didn’t even make
any money this quarter, “so no income tax,” where
with a value-added tax, they pay based on transaction, and that’s inescapable. It’s one reason why other
countries use it is that it is a much more effective
way to get revenue. If you’re a self-driving
truck company, you might not have many
humans making money, so there’s not much
income tax coming. With a value-added tax,
we get our fair share. A value-added tax would
generate between $700 billion and $800 billion if we
were to implement at half the European level. The European average VAT is 20%. Our economy is so vast that
if we added a VAT of 10%, it would generate $700
billion to $800 billion. That is my primary mechanism
to pay for the universal basic income because
you have $500 billion plus $800 billion with VAT. Then you’re at about
65% of the $2 trillion. This is the beauty of
universal basic income. We are already spending
hundreds of billions on health care, incarceration,
homelessness, all these services for
people that are falling through the cracks. Those expenses would go down
if these people were able to stay out of the emergency room. – Well that’s interesting. The Peterson Institute,
I was looking at some of their research. Apparently in the ’70s
in Manitoba, Canada, there was an experiment done
with several thousand people that looked at
universal basic income. There is some empirical
evidence of what happens. I found it interesting that
once a universal income was provided, there were
better outcomes when it came to things like health
and education. What’s happening there? – This is the most powerful
stuff of universal basic income, it that it’s very human. Mincome in that Canadian
town you are describing, what they found was that
hospital visits went down 9%. They found that domestic
violence went down. Mental health went up. Children stayed
in school longer. In another study
in North Carolina, they actually found that
children’s personalities changed to become more
conscientious and agreeable, which are both very
positive traits for academic and professional success. This is what we’re talking
about at the human level. Right now, do you know
what is really expensive? Dysfunction. People coming to the
emergency room and having massive problems that we as
a society end up paying for in various ways. Functionality is actually
much less expensive. We’re going to get hundreds
of billions back from things we’re currently
spending on health care, incarceration, and homelessness. Then, as the economy grows
because we’re putting money in the hands of
American consumers, we get 25% of the
growth back because that’s the ratio of revenue
to GDP growth in the U.S. With a VAT of 10%, you
essentially pay for $1,000 a month per American
adult in perpetuity. – You bring up this
notion of improving lives with economic security. It reminds me that this show
is called Ethics Matter, so we talk a lot about
what rights are and what human rights are. I feel like this country
is not in a place yet where there is a sense that it’s
government’s responsibility that everyone has
economic rights, and environmental rights,
and economic security. What do you think? – I think America has been
very fortunate for a very long time, but I think our
economy and society are progressing to a point where
the absence of a government point of view or action is
actually going to greatly diminish individual
economic rights and our quality of life, really. If we just let this thing go, we can all see what’s
going to happen. The value is just going
to get gathered up in a relatively small
number of hands of people, generally at the heads of
major technology companies, and the people that work
in those organizations. I’m friends with those people. They are generally good people. The thing that I think is
ridiculous is when people imagine that it’s somehow the
innovator’s responsibility to figure out all
of the downstream economic and social impacts
of their innovations. They have their heads
down just trying to make the thing work. It is our government’s job
and our leaders’ job to figure out all of the downstream
effects and make appropriate policies
and changes. That’s where we’ve fallen
asleep at the switch. Our government has become very
backward and dysfunctional. We’ve lost faith in it. Over the last 50 years,
we have just been stuck with this ’60s-era bureaucracy,
having food fights from decades ago, instead
of a government that’s appropriate to the
challenges of 2018 and 2020. That’s why I’m
running for president. About universal basic income, the social benefits, and
it was a lot of fun reading the studies, some
of which you cited, But I go through it
in my book in detail. It’s clear to me that
universal basic income would improve the lives of
millions of Americans, that we can easily afford it. The thing most people
do not realize, and I didn’t realize
it until I dug into it, we actually came
this close to passing a universal basic
income in 1971. Martin Luther King was for it. – That was under Nixon.
– Nixon was for it. A thousand economists
signed a letter saying this would be great. It passed the House
of Representatives. Then it stalled in the
Senate because the Democrats wanted more money. It wasn’t that
conservatives tanked it. It was that Senate
Democrats thought that it should be more generous. It’s not even very radical. We came this close, and it’s
been implemented in Alaska for 25 years in essence
through the petroleum dividend. – How do you change the
narrative around it being a government handout that
will lead to a lazy society? I can just see that’s what
you’re going to be up against. – You’re probably right. – You said that you’ve
met with lawmakers throughout your career. How do you sell it? – I’m actually very
confident that people are over the welfare/handout
framing in large part because the suffering
is so widespread. The welfare framing was
often about the other. It was like oh you’re going
to give them the money. – Now it’s a lot of us. – Yeah. It’s enough people now. The most recent polling
shows that support for universal basic income
is about 50-50 right now, and it’s just going
to go up from there. – Andrew Yang, what an
interesting and fascinating and, I think, relevant,
perspective you bring. Thank you so much
for joining us. – Thanks for having me. It’s been a pleasure. (upbeat music) – [Announcer] For
more on this program and other Carnegie Ethics
Studio Productions, visit There you can video
highlights, transcripts, audio recordings, and
other multimedia resources on global ethics. This program is made possible
by the Carnegie Ethics Studio and viewers like you.


  • leslie bond

    The underpin point is about if the UBI spending by the government will outweigh the government spending on welfare system, policing and prison system, and the need to make to a more stable society in the face of onslaught of AI and automation. The decision should be based on demographic statistics, taking into account the difference of living standard in different states, the contribution and burden of different states or even individuals, and other quantified and calculated indexes.

  • mrzack888

    The Republican thugs wanted to get RID of ALL social safety nets and JUST implement basic income, this is why the Democrats wanted a higher basic income before it was ultimately scrapped. We need Basic Income PLUS all other social safety nets together.

  • Tek Wilson

    The Society is already heading into people deciding to stop working,
    because most of us are skill less, can't go to school and the jobs don't pay enough to even want to work them.
    Being poor like myself and many others… why go to work to waste our time and energy just to use all that money that we earned to throw away on bills?
    There was a really great meme talking about why Millennials are not having kids? One Girl reply's Well Rent is $1500 and the min wage is only $12.

  • J Can du

    The "TRUTH" ….the "SHORT ANSWER" ……. WE CANNOT AFFORD CONVENTIONAL GREED ANYMORE. A Gauranteed Annual Income is necessary from here on in. The greedy elites won they got ALL THE MONEY ….NOW WHAT ????? …..The future requires everyone to have a place OR those left out will destroy the world out of revenge and who can blame them. Its either security for everyone or security for noone.

  • Justin Blount

    Mr. Yang. You’ve have such great a coherent Analysis of our current economic and human condition supported by sound empirical data. You have my undivided support and vote. I live in South Florida and I will do my best to spread your ideas and solutions. More people need to hear your platform. UBI will solve such a wide multitude of issues and stimulate an unforeseen economic growth in the personal lives of individuals this country so desperately needs. This shouldn’t be seen as some utopian idealism but rather as a sound economic solution to help improve the economic lives and value of many Americans where capitalism has abandon them. We must implement the best of socialism and capitalism in the age of automation.

  • diane webb

    I have just discovered you on FB. All you say sounds good as far as it goes. Where do you stand on politics and the US place in the world? Maybe you would be the best vice president where you could focus on your goals, leaving the political stuff to a democratic president.

  • Angelo Ramos

    Very good and innovative economic policies but terrible social policies…. You say your that asian guy that loves math that will be better than trump but you don't even have a 1/12 of his wealth…

  • Grace Subu

    Economically, Andrew Yang has an extremely strong platform and knows how to target trumps voter base because he understands the reasons for his election, however, on foreign policy he seems weak (not dumb, he makes perfect sense) but in a debating scenario with political giants, he won’t be able to deliver on specific policies unless he makes a financial case for decreasing defense and foreign spending. Trump was also elected because people felt he was the bully figure that would take care of ISIS, which as far as I can tell, has definitively diminished their threats to Americans as far as we can see. But, when trump is out of office, the resurgence of such issues is a valid possibility and Yang needs to be prepared for that.

  • Wayne P

    14:41 UBI $1000/month. I've heard it's 10-12% of GDP, that's expensive.
    It's not enough to prosper. Enough to stay out of jail? Incentivises staying out of trouble.
    It will be an option so it will not reduce benefits already in place.
    Pay For – A 10% VAT tax is easier to collect.

  • Randy Malone

    Andrew dismissed the fact that the manufacturing jobs were sent to foreign countries it was not
    due to automation . I saw over twenty factories leave southeast Missouri , if it was due to automation
    they would still be here . The jobs went to where the labor is cheap and abundant . I still think his Ideas
    are worth discussing .

  • A T

    automation happened long ago, for example, a washing machine is a robotic hand that permits a woman to do something else (like becoming an engineer), a fan is a robotic arm that circulates air that permits her to do something else too (like becoming a physicist), nowadays, automation has evolved to perform tasks that are impossible to be done by humans, I am not speaking on the tasks like washing or fanning, rather I am referring to intricate surgical procedures or actions performed under dangerous conditions, etc. the problem is to enable people to materialize their potential to contribute to society – invest in people's potentials

  • Ryan Smith

    Trump supporter here. This guy has my attention. I need to do more research, but he makes sense and I find myself agreeing with him. Interesting.

  • Keith Manning

    Poor interviewer Hint dear interviewer; you need to organise your questions in a methodical way. You didn't even let him explain what his plan was before quizzing him on it. Fail.

  • Chet Pomeroy

    EVERYONE will know that there's an extra $1000 in the budget, due to UBI, including landlords. When leases expire, they will adjust rents upward to accommodate for this new development.

  • Kevin Gaudette RSA– RE-IMAGINING WORK with Segments repeated 2-3 times

  • SociallyTriggered

    Andrew Yang is going to become a strong candidate. He is a good contrast to Trump. It would be interesting to know his other policies.

  • James Montoya

    How come no one ever mentions the fact that with UBI every homeless person will have $1K a month. Not big enough on a point to bring it up?

  • Chris Chen

    He'd need 65k doners to be on the stage. This man definitely deserve to be on the stage! Very much looking forward to it!

  • JR M

    I've forgotten how it felt to watch a candidate answer questions and back his policies with sources and not gut feelings.

  • Zhengyang Wu

    The key questions are 2:

    Will the welfare benefits be kept?

    Will the money be transferred to other countries?

    Great idea, but probably will not work in reality.

  • Michael Hashimoto

    The more I watch him the more I think even if he gets into office 8 years is not enough time to implement all of his ideas.

  • bansalsn

    Andrew here is an alternative solution : say there are roughly 100 mm minimum wage workers. Raise the minimum wage to $15/hr and then give the employers a tax rebate of $10/hr per minimum wage worker. That's roughly a $2 trillion bill. Adding 5% value added tax should be enough to meet this additional expense. This will make people more attractive than robots. It will put additional $1300 per month in the hands of every minimum wage worker. Business are happy because they don't have any extra burden. On the contrary they get incentive to hire people over robots. Small businesses also get a relief. This is win win for everyone except for robots and robot owners.

  • Mark Gu Chen

    Surprised that nobody here mentioned that this is a vision of (optimistic) future portrayed in Star Trek where nobody works just for money, but their passion and what they are good at.

  • USMC Dad

    Universal basic income will never work because businesses know that those people have more Capital so they will raise the prices of their products

  • USMC Dad

    The companies that make robots don't hire programmers and technicians robots don't break down and need mechanics to fix them.

  • R C

    Based on Yang’s plan, the one who claimed wealth fare can increase the income up to $1,000. But he seems ignored many retired baby boomers who have been paying years of income tax, but now only get slightly higher than $1000. Many of theses retired baby boomers will become the victims of inflation partly caused by his plan. Amazon and those big tech companies are not foolish swallowing those transaction fees charged by his plan, they will transfer those transaction fees to consumers for sure. I’m wondering how he explains his plan to those retired baby boomers.

  • Infected Monkey

    Finally someone with intelligence! I don't need the 1000 a month but others do! We all have our opinions! Hell I voted for trump and my wife voted for Hillary! To me there wasn't a clear winner in last election. But this guy damn yang 2020 thank you for being urself!

  • Ariadne Pyanfar

    I’m an Australian desperately hoping Yang wins in 2020. I have believed in the solutions a UBI offers for a long time. I think Australia needs one badly. If it happens in America it’s so much more likely to happen here.

  • eyePERTURE

    Andrew Yang is right on the money, perhaps he is the only candidate who understands the issues this country is currently facing, his solution is data driven and seems feasible and practical. He believes “Humanity First”, so do I! Americans should do themselves a favor by voting Andrew Yang as the president, we may see a prosperous America, again. Politicians are nothing but empty promises, it’s the time to let a social engineer lead the country into a new era.

  • Trish House

    The security of the population has to be the first priority of any government. Homelessness is never an option in a Republic form of government. That our government servants take our money but have denied us access to nearly 30% of our land mass, and forces hundreds of thousands of Americans to live in desperate homelessness without their rightful share, is the original
    and mortal sin of American government.

    Without free land there are no free people, whether they disobey or not. To be free in a free society we must insist on free-land rights for everyone. The landless and those forced to pay for their share of it are the slaves. To disobey is to refuse to pay taxes to a government that enforces its mortal sins upon our society.

    The earth provides us at no cost the land and natural resources necessary to our survival. No man, no government has the moral authority to deny a person the right to his or her free share of land and resources the earth has given us. To be free in a free society we must insist on free-land rights for everyone. To disobey government is to refuse to pay taxes to an entity that enforces its mortal sins upon our society. Patriots don't pay taxes for their own enslavement.

  • a Little Pal

    people are seriously dumb.
    you put money into the hand of your people, they spend it, then the money goes right back into the economy, so this is circulation, the money just goes around between people, and everyone has more to offer, more to spend. so what is the fuzz about doing this UBI thing?

  • TTgamer OP

    I noticed that he couldn't answer the question about job creation… I am curious to know how truck driving could be automated? sounds fascinating…

  • Alias HSW

    Will his VAT replace local sales tax at a brick and mortar; or is it limited to e-commerce as he always alludes to?

  • wolf rain88

    the bottom line is we are going to have more people than we have jobs to fill them and it's not going to get better it's only going to get worse just why are we building the stop gape of a wall that is not going to be enough because you can have cameras on the wall and it does not have to be big and fancy you just need the cameras and then have border security ride atvs to where they are trying to crosses to send them back so not that many new jobs will be made in that vs the amount of jobs that will be lost and think about it most of the country do not see Mexicans a lot so that means most of them are in states like texas that are illegal to be hear so not that many new jobs are created on that front either/so when you see jobs like truck driving customer support calling jobs to al and truckstop jobs transportation of gas and oil and hotel because in some part the truck drivers fuels that as well and even fast food jobs because there are automation that are very close to being able to make food for you at a restaurant going away and the retail is going to diminish due to Amazon and companies like it and by the time they make automation for the fast food they will have the means to automate the retail if i can make a robot that flips burgers there is know reason i would not use it in retail to replace a stocker or a unloader and even lawyers are going to lose to al in 15 years easy then without something like Universal basic income you will have mass homelessness the thing is a lot of people have not looked at the tech to know how concerned they really should be and think that's never going to happen and then it happens and there is riots in the streets and mass shootings because most people don't look at the facts of where we are where we are going and how close we are to getting there

  • Chulo

    If anything, nothing is polarizing about his suggestions. What we have always asked about from a politician in being clear, fair, whatever, he's doing it. This Republican is switching just to vote for this man.

  • Galene Descoteaux

    I only found out about Yang 2 months ago but was immediately a supporter. I was leaning towards Bernie or Kamala but Andrew has my vote now!

  • Annie S.

    This man makes so much sense it's scary! He's got my vote. C'mon everybody, put sentiments aside this time and vote for logic.

  • Michael Davis

    The idea is very interesting, but I’m not sure how he gets his math on the cost. Based on the adult US population times $12000 per year I’m getting a cost of about $3.8 trillion per year, not $2 trillion.

  • Talking Tiger

    The financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269.6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145.8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123.8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.

  • limhrl

    I like the UBI for all, but seniors should not be made to choose between UBI and their soc. security…soc. security is not welfare benefits, ..seniors work all their life and pay into a sort of pension plan and the govt. promise to give you SS if millionaire bill gates is given UBI, so should all seniors …without conditions and certainly not forced to choose between UBI and SSecurity— does yang know that SS uis not welfare ?

    IF YOU TELL SENIORS THEY CAN GET $12000 FREEDOM DIVIDEND ON TOP OF THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY, MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF SENIORS WILL VOTE FOR ANDREW YANG AND ENSURE THAT HE GETS INTO THE WHITE HOUSE !….do not make seniors decide between Soc. Security and Freedom dividend…Soc. Security is not welfare !…..a thousand dollars a month is a life saver for many seniors who are barely scraping by !…. ANDREW SHOULD TAP THE SENIOR POWER !!!….can somehow alert his campaign to this fact !

  • cleobella3

    Andrew Yang has my support. He is intelligent, an experienced leader, eloquent and highly capable. He has the vision and methods to lead us Americans into a brighter, stronger future. Lets put our best foot forward with our future in mind, no personal agendas and do what's right for all of America. Give everyone the rights that most developed countries enjoy and have. @t Vote for Andrew Yang!

  • John Ellis

    The lower-half of society is the laboring-class, the 50% working poor.  And as they are slow and careful of thought, they are most perfect for doing the most dangerous task in society, manual labor with it's pinch points and sheer points.  Also, being slow of thought they find manual labor challenging and rewarding, unlike those more intelligent who consider such work to be horrible drudgery.

    The middle 25% of society is the intelligent and educated middle-class, the top 25% are the genus ruling-class and again we find that everyone is given an intelligence most perfect for the tasks they are destined to fulfill.

    The goal of capitalism being an intelligence dictatorship that maximizes production for the laboring-class, consumption for the middle-class and profit for the ruling-class, it is impossible for society to have the moral fabric needed to achieve happiness. For happiness is to experience the four greatest emotions in life, namely compassion, pity and charity given in a way that best produces a grateful response.

    And so, as wealth is the property we have above what is needed for a comfortable life, the property rightfully owned by the one billion humans suffering want, surely, wealth needs to be outlawed as a crime against humanity. For when everyone desires only enough for a comfortable life, when everyone finds happiness in things other than hoarding wealth, than we shall have heaven on earth.

  • John Ellis

    Can we increase income for the 50% working poor, without
    reducing income for the 25% rich who own 75% of the wealth?

  • Jolene H

    I agree 100% with Yang but not sure the people are ready for such ideas. If he doesn't make it to the end, let's hope that he is the next Bernie Sanders and in 2024 the candidates use Yang's platform in the next race. Yesterday's crazy ideas are becoming today's standards with all the Dems. We might not be ready for all of Yang's idea right now but maybe next time.

  • Roderik Rodenburg

    One of the ways it can be payed for, is a financial transaction tax. It means that for each and every transaction money is put aside. For example 0.3% of is enough to pay for the basic income in Germany. (See f.e. professor David Precht on YT, if you can understand German). For easy calculating: let's take 0.5 % – If you buy something for 100 Dollars, you pay 50 cnts for the basic income. And you'll pay 50.000 Dollars for the UBI when you buy something for 10.000.000, ten million. May-be the percentage in the USA will be 0.5 %. In any cae, it can all be automated also. I would support Andrew Yang, espacialy because of his human interest. thx!

  • Neal Tauss

    PROBLEMZ w/ YANG THANG: …. and speaking of all-PHASE economic re-distribution……while Solar and Wind currently CREATE MORE JOBS than nuclear-coal-gas&oil COMBINED….Andrew Yang (whose position on solar is …mm…hmmm… ) wants to build low-yield nukes….at the rate of several per city….all over the country….PRIVATE INSURERS WON'T TOUCH IT… leaving 'US' w/ the 'POTENTIAL' clean-up CO$T$…and increa$ingly larger monthly power bill$….nuclear power having the HIGHE$T CO$T/kilowatt DY$-FUNCTION of ANY form of energy production while folki$$ing politic$ into the hands of fewer of 'US' than ALL OTHER forms of energy production COMBINED…(..dollar for dollar…decade for decade…the most HEAVILY subsidized..)..MoreMoneyGoingToFewerOligarchsMakingMoreLongTailedDecisionsAbout…us…THIS IS Corporate Capture…Andrew. How can you tout economic equanimity AND nuclear power from the same podium? Nuclear Power makes way too Few…. WAY too capable….of rolling their agenda over way too many…….One lousy thousy/mo CAN'T save us from Corporate Clawback….but the economically DEMOCRATIZING functions of Roof-top Solar AND $10000/mo…..? Can. When Andrew Yang tells us that the 'Freedom Dividend' will make $1000/mo the new Zero…. the Devil in the Details is the Real Deal Feel…..

  • Chris Juan

    I've been following Yang for a while. Why is Google only recommending this video to me now? Google better start recommending these videos to everyone following the 2020 election. These echo chambers are really destroying democracy.

  • Chris de Haan

    This is the next president beyond identity politics he understands the actual fundamental change that ensures the right of dignified lives for all which a sovereign constitutional right.

  • only one sky

    WSJ-Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Richard Branson and other tech titans are promoting the idea of universal basic income, as a way to help citizens weather job disruptions caused by emerging technologies. Canada is giving it a try, with a pilot program that gives participants up to $17,000

  • Jpop Jr

    The major problem is "believing" AI is above and has greater value then We The People. Put those thoughts in there proper place. Tax the heck out of all companies all over the world out of thinking companies "those individuals" are superior. This united effort will create a movement in governments all over the world. These United Nations will collectively put those companies "individuals" in check. Tax 75% of the gain from AI and distribute these to all people. Then see if those companies "individuals" continue to think that AI is the future. I understand technology. AI does have a place in our lives. To serve "We the People". Why would anyone bowel, sorry, bow, to the AI. Control those companies "individuals" into the ones in a dilemma. People are and always will be the ones in charge. Can you believe those companies "individuals" are giving greater value to AI companies. Why would those companies "individuals" do that, is a good question. By the way, Individuals of companies are doing this. Why would companies "individuals" do that was asked; This means that those companies "individuals" are putting themselves above everyone else "outside the company". How does this make sense to "We the People". Allowing few companies "individuals" to self proclamation, to self importance, over the prosperity of all. "We the People" have the power to make it stop. To make AI serve "We the People". We the People are the lives of our earth. We the People are what is life. We are what is important. Recall, from English, well actually, any language, Composition, the science behind the production of a great movie. The writers and directors of that movie have to mix in some truth into the story line to give the movie a personal touch. To make the move more exciting. That is done so we experience emotion. Movies always mix in some truth. Otherwise movie makers and companies trying to take over would be boring, would have no worth, because of the disconnect from "We the People". That is what those companies "individuals" are attempting to do. They want us to turn away from the real act. From the real issues. We know what this looks like. Trump uses it all the time. His gimmick is racism. Those companies "individuals" is turning us away from the truth. While we are looking in the other direction, those companies "individuals" will be trying to take "We the People" over. They are putting themselves in charge. Those companies "individuals" are using the same movie logic, disguising aggression with shadows of concern. That is politics. "We the People" are aware of those gimmicks because of years of experiences with those who try to govern at the expense of us, the true value. If we give those companies "individuals" the power, they will not stop there. They will spiral out of control. We the People have to restore our right to power. Those companies "individuals" believe we can't see through giving $1000 a month is under-valuating "We the People". That is trying to turn our attention. The are saying, go do the arts. Go learn something else. Get a job. Leave technology to those individuals. The companies "individuals" believe we can't see their movement. Their intent of taking over. They believe we can't see through this. YES! they can form logical statements, put words together. We "The People" are the ones in power. Do not let those companies "individuals" reduce We The People to insignificant impoverished beings.

  • Secure the Bag

    The only grift I have with this (which isn't really a grift), is instead of 1000, it should be raised overtime as well.

  • Huy Ngo

    although I'm not rich, still donated him $50 and trying to support him some here and where. He is representing Asian American and the whole Asian. Give his family help while he helping us.

  • Cookie 7

    Make America wiser and whole.21th century american President Andrew Yang solving Math for a better life for united Americans. freedom Dividend unites the humanities to move forward Healthy and Build a better soceity.UBI inspires humanities.Scarcity will sink Humanities when hungry.Make America first and tbe world will follow.

  • Eric Allen

    Yang:  FY I:  The fact is that capitalism has been, for some time now, failing in its obligation to provide jobs that pay well enough for workers to provide for themselves and, eventually, a family.  The number of jobs is going down every day as employers look for more and more ways to cheat them of their fair share of American profits and a reasonable share of the American dream.  Even $15 an hour is not enough for a truly livable yearly wage (Just over $30K ) and as we all know, COLA’s are woefully inadequate for the purpose of preserving buying power, let alone include any kind of pay raise.  You can keep your $12K a year. With a $15 an hour job, better SSI and Medicare of all, affordable day-care and paid leave; you just might even be able to afford to support a small family.  Anything less than that is a nonstarter.

    Just like at the majority of Neo-Liberals, you dangle shiny things in our faces that deliver no stability at all and the American government gets by on the cheap, with nothing useful being offered.  That’s the intent here, isn’t it?  Your basic motto for the working class of something less than half a loaf is just not enough for our families.  Why the hell can’t you folks figure that one out.

    So, go away loser or come back with a way better plan.  I want no part of your degrading contest.  This is not, after all, a game show we are playing at.

    Peace, Love & Hope ( better than the hope you offer us at least )

  • Bruce Keane Anderson

    Live in New York State and want to change party affiliation in order to help Andrew Yang get nominated?
    CHANGE OF ENROLLMENT (N.Y. Election Law Section 5-304(3))
    An application to change one’s party enrollment for 2020 must be received by the board of elections no later than October 11, 2019.

  • breeze787

    Consumer Purchase is 71% of GDP! Giving $1,000/month for every citizen will blow GDP into record levels not seen by any economic measurement. But . . . say we don't do this? Automation will start eroding jobs slowly over time and americans will go home with pink slips and try to assess a future displaced by robots. And how does the jobless buy the newest technological whizbang without a revenue stream? Capitalism needs a strong middle class. Andrews Freedom Dividend accomplishes that along with a host more humanitarian reasons. Vote Yang2020 we deserve him.

  • Zach Zhu

    Why in 26:17 Stephanie just suddenly end this conversation?! I was fascinated to watch this and it's just stopped?? "突如其来的骚,闪断你的腰!"😂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *