re: Andrew Yang

quote:

---

Not universal basic income. Strict residency requirements. Only get one time payment in October. Surprise surprise, Alaska government is spending too much and wants to keep taking half of it from Alaska residents

---

Isn’t it basically dividends paid annually based on earned income from a fund that has been getting a certain % of oil revenue set aside over the years to save for the future when or if oil revenue declines?

I think to qualify to have to have lived in state by Jan 1st through Dec 31st for each year paid with intention of permanent residency, not sentenced for a felony during year or incarcerated during the year.

Even with the state trying to take more & more the state & payments are still smaller than what is earned annually (individual payouts have mostly been just around $1000 to $2000 a year depending on formula) which is why fund is now at around $55 Billion for a state that has around 740,000 people.

One of the least populated states with large oil revenues, no state income tax, and also one with a lot of land that is federal govt owned & land by its geography & climate for future economic development outside of oil decided to stop the state from wasting current revenue from oil and started to save for the future when oil revenues go down while still paying dividends off earnings to qualified citizens from the fund’s earnings.

It’s hardly the best example for Yang & followers to use to show how universal basic income would work for entire country especially talking about paying 8 to 10 times more money annually to each individual than Alaska usually pays qualified citizens, also paying this to around 300 to 400 times the amount of people that Alaska pays (based on final qualifications for each year), and then making amount set or guaranteed versus a dividend based on the fund’s earnings.