4. UBI is more likely to affect inequality adversely. If you give Bill Gates and "Bill the plumber" the same $12K, the former could save it all leading to a marginal increase in wealth while the latter is more likely to need to spend most of it, w little effect on their wealth.

5. The federal job guarantee puts pressure on the private sector to step up its game and improve job quality (pay, benefits, and safety). The UBI as a stand alone de facto will subsidize bad jobs. @StephanieKelton @ptcherneva

6. Yang says his UBI as "bureaucratically efficient" since it will replace a host of social programs. This is without ensuring nonpoverty incomes for all. The federal job guarantee is assures the lowest paid employee gets above poverty wages. @StephanieKelton @ptcherneva

7. If it's an either-or proposition federal job guarantee>universal basic income. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/02/federal-job-guarantee-universal-basic-income-investment-jobs-unemployment/

8.Yang motivates his case by saying we'll all need incomes soon without jobs because of automation. But he never details precisely how soon. And he never establishes that all work SHOULD be automated, e.g. we may want to retain care work (elder and child) for the human touch.

9. One of the major objectives of a federal job guarantee is to professionalize and provide well-paid quality care work accessible at low expense to the general public. Solarization is another. How soon will Green Jobs that can be performed by FJG workers be mechanized fully?

To be fair, I believe he is claiming that artificial intelligence makes comprehensive automation possible. AI was not a prominent feature of past waves of automation. Still I want to see the detailed case for the speed and scope of elimination of all work.