Hey, what's with that "poor" thing, you really know how to hurt a guy, and surely you understand what a tender-hearted hypersensitive guy I am, right?

How about an even 100K for the UBI, and I'm pretty much an anti-tax guy. How about no taxes pf any sort whatsoever.

We'd obviously have to expand a little on our current system of gov't finance by means of the creation of even more massive amounts of Fed Res money (aka 'currency inflation' in 1960's jargon), but it's working in Venezuela and Zimbabwe, why not here?

I suspect [9] was a poor attempt at sarcasm...

Well, moving beyond invective, any proposal like that would need to be a lot clearer what "middle" means. Most of the country, from $30K incomes to $150K incomes, says they are part of the middle class - because it sounds so virtuous.

Which middle income did you have in mind for your proposed UBI? And under your plan (no pressure, of course) what would the tax rates be on the UBI, unearned income, owned property, and earned income?

What we really need to "help the economy and everything in it" is UBI at a middle=income, middle-class level. That would obviate the need for any level/any version of unemployment insurance, and stimulate absolutely everything, right?

IMO the progressives do not pound the point home in a simple yet succinct manner that not only does "trickle down" and "Producer / Job creator" tax cuts not work, the average tax paying American also further subsidizes the wealthy by providing food stamps to those who manage to work 40 hours per week probably at 2 or three jobs and yet still are below the poverty line.

Come to think of it, while we are dialing up studies there should be one on the mental health and level of general satisfaction/happiness with life of people making a living wage compared to those who don't.

After all, that's the same logic as "The more voters there are, the more involvement there is in the results of elections, and the stronger and safer and more equitable our democratic society will be. Clearly, making it easier for everyone to vote is in the interests of the business and ruling classes."

And that's not the conclusion about voting reform that those classes are currently drawing, from what I hear. Kind of like the apparent Republican response to the higher wage pressure in low-paying jobs that you are so upbeat about: "Quick, cut those semi-generous unemployment benefits ASAP, so we can continue to pay starvation wages."