Basic income is openly and explicitly redistribution. Many of us in Europe have found redistributive tax-and-spend policies to be quite successful.
> Let's forget about the question if this is moral or not to take away money from people who are working hard just to give away these money to those, who are not working at all.
In civilized countries those who are not working at all are already given money that's taken from the rich. The big difference with a basic income is that those who are working hard at low-paying jobs also get money.
> the taxation will make costs of work higher and higher. Country economy would become less competitive.
A country with closer income equality will be more pleasant to live in, so maybe people will be willing to work for lower take-home wages and this will balance the higher income tax.
It would be good to have some kind of international tax settlement though. Otherwise we have a race to the bottom (we already see that with corporation tax and e.g. Ireland) that ends in no country being able to tax and the whole world (except for the very rich) being worse off.
> In addition avoiding taxes would start to be really profitable - people would start opening fake companies abroad, create fake costs, etc. it happens now as well, but the scale could be much bigger.
People already avoid tax as much as they can, I don't think this would change that. If you're the kind of person who avoids 40% tax you would still avoid 30% tax, IMO.
> As usually, big players would be able to avoid taxes, so the one who would be hurt most are the "middle class".
The whole idea of it being universal is that it's the working / lower middle class that benefits the most. Blindly assuming that the rich are just not going to pay their taxes is no way to run a government - if they're not paying, make them pay.
> Let's forget about the question if this is moral or not to take away money from people who are working hard just to give away these money to those, who are not working at all.
In civilized countries those who are not working at all are already given money that's taken from the rich. The big difference with a basic income is that those who are working hard at low-paying jobs also get money.
> the taxation will make costs of work higher and higher. Country economy would become less competitive.
A country with closer income equality will be more pleasant to live in, so maybe people will be willing to work for lower take-home wages and this will balance the higher income tax.
It would be good to have some kind of international tax settlement though. Otherwise we have a race to the bottom (we already see that with corporation tax and e.g. Ireland) that ends in no country being able to tax and the whole world (except for the very rich) being worse off.
> In addition avoiding taxes would start to be really profitable - people would start opening fake companies abroad, create fake costs, etc. it happens now as well, but the scale could be much bigger.
People already avoid tax as much as they can, I don't think this would change that. If you're the kind of person who avoids 40% tax you would still avoid 30% tax, IMO.
> As usually, big players would be able to avoid taxes, so the one who would be hurt most are the "middle class".
The whole idea of it being universal is that it's the working / lower middle class that benefits the most. Blindly assuming that the rich are just not going to pay their taxes is no way to run a government - if they're not paying, make them pay.