A corporate income tax by any other name. Only, this one comes with voting power. (Does it?) Reminds me of Dr. Johnson's description of going to sea: like being in prison, but with the chance of drowning.



And, it's unnecessary. IF a UBI is a good idea, then it does not need to be funded by revenues of any sort. It can be funded by simply printing the money and letting the abundant supply on which the notion is based - the excess production that would create the profits that would create the dividends - simply absorb the newly created demand.



The sea change that makes the whole idea of a UBI work is the near-zero marginal cost of production of so many things. Consequently, the tax to "fund" the UBI should be payable by the time-tested tax we call inflation. That result is achieved by giving people money to buy the outputs. In many cases, the average cost of production might actually fall, with the result that, in the aggregate, inflation won't happen. So there won't be a tax.



The only reason to tax in any form - including by entitling a public depository to dividends - is to prevent government spending - and the UBI IS government spending - from crowding out the private use of resources. Unless too much money chases too few goods, there is no inflation. The premise of Prof. Varoufakis's argument is that "too few goods" is no longer a problem. If so, then there can't be too much money, at least not at the level he is proposing to distribute it.



I do not disagree with Prof. Varoufakis's central argument. We citizens, by our good conduct and respect for the laws under which things come to be made and the profits owned by capitalists, HAVE contributed to the productive effort and should be compensated for our forbearance from insurrection. The more production our good behavior enables, the greater that compensation should be. Until recently, that compensation could be handled through the wage channel, as most citizens were ACTIVELY involved in production, and their passive contribution could be incorporated into their wages. Now, with globalization and, more important, automation, more and more of us will be contributing only passively. So the compensation channel for that element needs to change. The "dividend" makes sense, but printing money that can be spent at ANY business, not just IPO'd corporations (unless you're just trying to get the Koch Bros. to go along) is the simplest and most direct way to get the job done. Anything else would be eyewash.