Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The #YangGang has a $3 trillion problem
The #YangGang has a $3 trillion problem
Mar 16, 2026 6:32 PM

Entrepreneur Andrew Yang is running for president as a Democrat. Yang has made a Universal Basic e (UBI) of $1,000/month to all American adults the centerpiece of his campaign.

While Yang doesn’t show up in any polls, he has a growing internet following that can be found under the hashtag #YangGang (not to be confused with Chinese politician Yang Gang).

The idea of a UBI has proponents on the political right and left. Proponents on the right tend to emphasize that an unconditional UBI would be more efficient than our current mishmash of welfare programs, which require a large bureaucracy tasked with determining each applicant’s eligibility and then making the paternalistic calculus of what services or products the truly deserving should be given. While I’m skeptical even of this argument in its favor, I state it here to show that there are small-government reasons to support a UBI.

As justification for his proposal, Yang rightly notes that our decline in manufacturing employment over the last few decades is not due to trade or immigration but automation. So he should get credit for having more insight into this problem than President Trump, for example.

That said, just because Yang has some understanding of the problem does not mean that he has a workable solution. Indeed, his proposed UBI would be a social and economic disaster.

According to Yang’s campaign website, he would pay for his $1,000/month UBI to every American adult by

reducing current welfare spending by giving people already receiving benefits the choice to opt-in to the UBI instead (but not do both), reducing spending by up to $600 billion (a very generous estimate);adding a Value-Added Tax (VAT) on business to “generate $800 billion in new [tax] revenue”;adding “$500-600 billion in new revenue from economic growth and activity” spurred by the UBI; andreducing costs of healthcare, incarceration, and homelessness of “$100-200 billion as people would take better care of themselves and avoid the emergency room, jail, and the street.”

First of all, even granting Yang’s generous figures and presuming no negative distortion to the economy (which is unlikely), the total amount to fund a UBI this amounts to, between increased tax revenue and decreased government spending, is $2.2 trillion. There are currently more than 250 million American adults. Giving each of them $1,000/month adds up to $3 trillion/year, leaving $800 billion of Yang’s UBI unaccounted for.

Second of all, Yang’s figures are fanciful.

Lets begin with Yang’s #1 source of funding: reduced spending on welfare benefits. The progressive Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) notes, “About 9 percent of the federal budget in 2017, or $357 billion, supported programs that provide aid (other than health insurance or Social Security benefits) to individuals and families facing hardship.” Thus, even if every person receiving these benefits opted-in to Yang’s UBI, he still has overestimated the savings by roughly $200 billion.

One might object that these are not the only entitlement programs that could be cut. The CBPP notes, “Four health insurance programs — Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace subsidies — together accounted for 26 percent of the budget in 2017, or $1 trillion.” Unfortunately, Yang doesn’t want to cut healthcare spending. He wants to increase it: he supports Medicare for all. Thus, it is possible — if not likely — that any savings he might gain from cutting welfare benefits would be overshadowed by increased healthcare spending before any of it could be used to fund a UBI.

If we look at his second and third sources of funding, we see the risk of what I have elsewhere described as “a cannibalistic circularity of redistribution.” Technology is displacing jobs (never mind that it is also creating jobs), so a tax is proposed, in Yang’s case at each stage of production, to give to people who have lost their e so that they can then spend it … on items produced by those panies, ultimately paying part if not all of the tax in increased prices. You can’t “increase your bank account by writing yourself a check.” Increasing prices and/or reducing profits through taxes (Yang’s source #2) in order to subsidize spending will not result in “economic growth” (Yang’s source #3). At best, the result will be net zero, but only if everyone is required to spend 100 percent of their UBI check every month. If not, it will shrink the economy, not grow it.

Last, Yang’s #4 source of funding is optimistic at best. Who’s to say that people will use their UBI to take care of their health, stay out of trouble, and stay off the street?

Worst case: I presume $1,000/month, no-strings-attached, could buy a lot of illegal drugs, for example, funding an addiction that could land someone on the street and/or in jail and wreak havoc upon that person’s health. I’m not a fan of paternalism, but the reason our current programs are so paternalistic is (ostensibly, at least) precisely out of concern for things like the health and shelter of welfare recipients. I’m more sympathetic to UBI arguments that acknowledge that cost than those like Yang’s that try to claim the opposite.

Of course, I hardly think most people would suddenly e drug addicts and do not wish to imply that. The point is simply that drug addicts exist, and Yang’s proposal would guarantee them $1,000/month just as much as a struggling undergraduate who wishes she had time to do more yoga and afford to eat organic. A more medium-case scenario: someone like me who totally would have blown at least a portion of $1,000/month on video games, Mountain Dew Code Red, and Taco Bell when I was in college, doing nothing positive for my health, to say the least.

All that is to say, while an $800 billion shortfall is the best-case scenario for Yang’s UBI, I’m not convinced any of his funding sources would get him anywhere near even that. Leading people on with the promise of $1,000/month without proper attention to these details is not simply imprudent, it is irresponsible and could be dangerous. I’m not convinced any UBI is feasible, but Yang’s would bring a slew of unintended consequences that would amount to an additional $3 trillion social problem, rather than alleviating the ones we have now.

As is the case with so many similar social panaceas, if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

Image credit: Andrew Yang by Marc Nozell

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Rev. Sirico on ‘The Blaze’: Catholic Bishops Reject New HHS Concessions
Rev. Robert Sirico appeared on the February 8 edition of “The Blaze” to discuss the revisions to the HHS mandate announced by the White House on January 20. The following video features a brief part of Rev. Sirico’s contribution to the show. You may see the entire piece by going to The Blaze TV website and signing up for a free 14-day trial. ...
Samuel Gregg on C-SPAN
Earlier this week at the Heritage Foundation, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg argued that if our elected leaders don’t find the courage to reform the economy and government spending soon, the U.S. could find itself in the same terrible economic situation as many European countries do today. Gregg’s lecture will be broadcast this weekend on CSPAN 2 Book TV at 8:45pm EST on Saturday and at 4:45pm EST on Sunday, February 17. ...
How Can the Church Encourage Vocational Stewardship?
One of the major focuses of On Call in Culture is to remind Christians that discipleship doesn’t end when Sunday service concludes. Yet in going about our daily work, we should also be careful that we don’t neglect the important role the church can fill when es to matters of vocational stewardship anddaily cultural engagement. Over at (re)integrate, Dr. Amy Sherman, author of Kingdom Calling: Vocational Stewardship for the Common Good, offers ten suggestions for how the church might encourage...
What Will the Next Papal Conclave Be Like?
It hasn’t happened in some 600 years: a conclave of cardinals called together to elect a pope, while the previous pope is still living. So what will this conclave look like? First, Benedict XVI will officially step down on February 28. The conclave will begin soon thereafter, as quickly as the cardinals across the world can gather in Rome. Benedict is allowed to attend, but not vote; no cardinal over the age of 80 is eligible to vote. Father Federico...
Audio: Samuel Gregg Discusses ‘Becoming Europe’ on the Georgene Rice Show
Georgene Rice recently interviewed Samuel Gregg about his latest book, ing Europe: Economic Decline, Culture, and How America can Avoid a European Future. Her show airs on KDPQ FM in Portland, Oregon. Rice says that ing Europe is “sobering, but not hopeless.” She says that it Exposes the true scope of the crisis gripping our transatlantic cousins: the crush of economic debt, governments consuming close to 50 percent of the economy, high taxation, sharply aging populations, crony capitalism, and staggeringly...
‘He feels like he has been left behind in some way’
Kishore Jayabalan, Director of Istituto Acton in Rome, gave an interview today with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty regarding the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. While the pope cited his health as the reason he was stepping down, Jayabalan was asked if there were other contributing factors. He does also talk about the pace of global media and politics and events today. So it’s also the circumstances that are surrounding his age and ill-health. I believe what he says, that the...
The Various Challenges of the Higher Education Bubble
The latest topic of The City podcast is the higher education bubble, featuring Cate MacDonald, Dr. John Mark Reynolds, and Dr. Holly Ordway. Reynolds makes the point that bubbles can arise when things are overvalued, but that it is important to determine whether that thing is relatively overvalued or absolutely overvalued. That is, to speak of a higher education bubble is to recognize that higher education is relatively more expensive than it is worth, but that it isn’t therefore worth...
Pope Benedict: The Capitalist System is Virtuous
Reflecting on the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, Philip Booth, professor at Cass Business School in London, says the pope was clear on his economic ideas. As he said in Caritas in Veritate: “Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se”. In other words, credit derivative swaps are not evil, but those who...
Samuel Gregg: ‘Benedict XVI: Reason’s Revolutionary’
Over on National Review Online, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg considers what will be Pope Benedict’s last legacy: In ing weeks, there will be mentaries on what this Pope has achieved in a relatively short time. This ranges from his efforts to root out what Ratzinger once called the “filth” of sexual deviancy that has inflicted such damage on the priesthood, his successful outreach to Catholicism’s Eastern Orthodox brothers, his generally excellent bishop appointments, to his reforms of the liturgy....
Audio: Rev. Sirico discusses Pope Benedict XVI’s Resignation
Greg Corombus of Radio America interviewed Acton President and Co-founder Rev. Robert Sirico to discuss the resignation of Pope Benedict VXI. Rev. Sirico had this to say about Pope Benedict: I think he was more than a caretaker pope. I think he unpacked a lot of the pontificate of John Paul II in the sense that he really delineated some of the teaching and expressed it in a slightly different way. John Paul was not an easy act to follow...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved