There has been a lot of talk about Universal Basic Income recently, the pros and cons of it. Some of the good aspects are:

• Replaces welfare payments without the costs of bureaucracy
• Typically inspires people to do more with their life, not less
• In the USA especially, will save people from working 2 full-time jobs
• Helps address the growing divide between poor and rich

And if the USA wants to keep selling us the idea that they are the greatest and richest democracy of all time, giving a UBI to help their poorest seems like the least they can do.

Negatives include failed experiments that weren’t as well run or run long enough to be meaningful. And the obvious cost, which must be met by increased taxation.

But here is an additional benefit – reparation for slavery. This is a hugely complicated argument, and one of the hardest parts is actually identifying who gets paid, and of course how much.

Given that actual reparation will never occur, and black people in the USA are worse off in general – regardless of the reasons – then a UBI is a way of effectively providing reparation without specifically doing so.

It is a fuzzy solution, and that is OK. Because fuzzy, with all of its faults, is better than nothing.

• All disadvantaged people will see an improvement in their lives
• Including black people as a form of reparation
• Some people will choose to be lazy. They probably would anyway
• Most people will use the cash to improve their life
• The economy will get a boost. Politicians who believe in “trickle down” will struggle to disagree with “trickle up”
• It won’t be available to people outside of the tax system – illegal immigrants