Oh, so maybe we should fund UBI by just stripping out the capital gains exemptions that allow insanely rich people to get insanely richer.
Some people have more money than they need, it can be removed from them - the intricacies of how they got that money should be very carefully considered when it comes to structuring how UBI would be funded - but they clearly have more money in absolute terms. And that wealth is transferable.
Also, in the western world, we have enough of everything. No one starves in America because there isn't enough corn, they starve because they don't have enough money to afford it - no one is homeless because no homes could be built, they're homeless because nobody wants to pay for the home to be built.
I think the point is you cannot go infinitely far with that concept. Wealth allows you to get a share of the productive capacity of the world. Giving everyone a billion dollars does not automatically mean we have enough production capacity and land to have everyone live in a mansion.
Now we can certainly say that "hey maybe if these guys all didn't have such a big mansion or as many cars everyone else would be better off", but you have to be explicit about that. It's about taking away things people like and to put that effort elsewhere.
How do you transfer it though? If some businessman has all his wealth tied up in stock in his business, how do you convert that to money? Some other person has to buy the stock. All this does is move the wealth around.
Wealth taxes have been discussed in the modern political stage - but I'm a bit :shrug: about them - I think it'd be fine to continue to only tax capital gains when they're realized - so as long as that businessman can't effectively use any of his wealth he doesn't pay taxes on it - as soon as he benefits from his wealth he pays taxes on the accrued gains.
It doesn't matter. You bleed them through inflation, VAT, whatever. The finance may be abstract, but at the end of the day money is claims for (future) economic output and you can dilute that as needed.
Some ways are better than other, but this idea that the powerful can hide their power through accounting tricks alone is a failure to think at multiple layers of abstraction.
Some people have more money than they need, it can be removed from them - the intricacies of how they got that money should be very carefully considered when it comes to structuring how UBI would be funded - but they clearly have more money in absolute terms. And that wealth is transferable.
Also, in the western world, we have enough of everything. No one starves in America because there isn't enough corn, they starve because they don't have enough money to afford it - no one is homeless because no homes could be built, they're homeless because nobody wants to pay for the home to be built.
These are all solvable problems.