are designed? That it's that simple??

Or are there likely a variety of options considered, and fiscal considerations made for each?

Sometimes programs are set up a certain way bc that's what the process (and budget) at the time allows *shrug*

If duplicate benefits would multiply the cost of a UBI program (already estimated at ~$3T in the analysis I linked above, which is inching towards M4A pricetag territory) and prevent it's passage, maybe the choice aspect introduces a cost control as well.

Which I still don't think is apocalyptic so long as folks would be allowed to continue receiving their existing benefits unless they opt-out (or max out, in the case of a benefit like TANF)


>i dont understand the logic in making them chose and not
>everyone else.
>
>keeping benefits and adding $1000 per month (unconditional) is
>better than having to chose between receiving one or the
>other. is there some scenario where thats not true?