To my mind, Universal Basic Income (UBI) is the most radical attempt to
address the complexity that is introduced by trying to only give 
benefits to the &quot;deserving&quot;: there&#x27;s often a view that social benefits
(food stamps, income support, child benefits, health care, etc, etc)
should only be given to those who &quot;need&quot; it. So then you need to:<p>- decide who actually &quot;needs&quot; the benefit<p>- figure out how to recognise these people (&quot;means-tested&quot; benefits!)<p>- catch the people defrauding the system<p>Instead, you could just say, e.g. for the case of child benefit, that every
child receives $400&#x2F;month and get rid of:<p>- the complexity in deciding who gets $400&#x2F;month<p>- the enforcement of fraud<p>The &quot;underserving&quot; middle- and upper-income will receive this money too,
but it doesn&#x27;t matter - it&#x27;s effectively coming out of the higher taxes
they are paying already.<p>UBI is just a generalization of this idea to all benefits.<p>Introducing two kinds of dollars smacks, to me, of the same mindset that
introduced means-testing&#x2F;etc in the first place: &quot;we don&#x27;t want fraud&quot;, &quot;we
want this to only go to deserving purposes&quot;. Lots of complexity, hard to
manage, and for no convincing benefit.