I am a fan of Andrew Yang's idea of giving everyone a baseline of $1000/month that's 18 or older, minus any money they are already receiving from the govt. The Freedom Dividend. I think he has a fairly sound idea of coming up with the funds in order to make it happen (VAT tax, could be a better idea but its sound enough).
And I also buy into the idea of a 'trickle up' situation if we were to do that.
But Yang didn't impress in his first showing to the public and I unfortunately think that will result in his campaign being over.
Interestingly though, Kamala Harris' idea of a tax break on the middle class is something like a universal basic income, though not, as Vox points out. Here's the gist:
The latest volley in the competition is the LIFT the Middle Class Act from Harris. As the Atlantic’s Annie Lowrey explains, the bill would offer a sizable cash payment to most middle-class households. Single people would get $250 per month or $3,000 a year, married couples would get $500 per month or $6,000 a year, and it would phase out for singles without kids making $50,000 or more, and for married couples or single people with kids making $100,000 or more. It costs about $200 billion in the first year or $2 trillion over 10, roughly in the range of the price tag for the 2017 tax cuts.
Vox points out, I think correctly, the issue with it not being a perfect plan is who it excludes - the poorest and children.
Also I am unclear on how it will be funded. Anyone know?
Contrast that with Elizabeth Warren's idea - Accountable Capitalism Act. This would redistribute the wealth generated from the biggest corporations, funneling a good amount back into the workers hands. I am not super familiar but on the face of it, I like the idea.
So they both have legislation proposed. Broad strokes I think Warren is getting to the root of the issue far better. Yet to be seen how realistic either of their proposals are though.