pull down to refresh
Because you actually need to deliver proof of work for unemployment benefits. That extra factor makes it unattractive as a way to leech, and is also illustrating why cashing in pensions of deceased people is much more attractive - regardless of what DOGE did or did not find - and is, I believe, a much more common crime. I'll try to find some numbers on that.
The impact of fraud becomes much bigger too: right now, if someone steals my identity, claims they are me and gets a social security check in my name, they cheat the system of something I wouldn't be getting, so I lose nothing. When you do this with UBI though, it takes away my lifeline.
Maybe I'm wrong and overfocused on the downside of it all, it's just that ever since all these techbros started pitching UBI, have not been able to think of a scenario where the whole can be secure without total privacy invasion.
Because you actually need to deliver proof of work for unemployment benefits.
But I was asking about Social Security, which is not an unemployment benefit. You just get it for being old enough, provided you worked when you were young. If you stole an old person's identity, it should be just as easy to capture their stream of benefits as it would be to capture someone's UBI.
I also don't see why it requires any more of a privacy invasion than current benefits. Again, all you'd have to show is identity, as opposed to identity plus other personal information, which is required for current conditional benefits.
Ok, I can appreciate that. I still don't see why you'd expect it to be worse than the current situation with Social Security.
If you're thinking about magnitude as making it different, without spending a ton more on transfer programs it would be hard to much higher than about $8k per person.