Despite no explicit proposals by Vice President Harris, her past policy positions suggest a tendency to advocate for measures that could perpetuate poverty rather than facilitate upward mobility.

Advocates of the far-left, including Harris, often support the concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI), which provides welfare payments without work requirements, aiming to address economic insecurity. However, rather than enhancing income potential or fostering human capital growth, UBI proponents may inadvertently increase government dependency among the poor.

Unfortunately, the repercussions of unconditional cash transfers, like those under UBI, on low-income households were found to be adverse. Research from the National Bureau of Economic Research revealed that UBI led to reduced work participation, declined weekly working hours, and lowered overall income, excluding cash transfers.

Despite diminishing public support, with just 35% of Americans in favor of UBI as of 2023, could Vice President Harris push a hidden UBI agenda if elected president?

In her role as vice president, Harris cast a pivotal tie-breaking vote to expand the child tax credit through the inflationary American Rescue Plan. By turning the credit into a fully refundable benefit distributed through monthly checks regardless of tax liability, Harris and fellow Democrats explored a UBI-like test run.

If this enhanced tax credit becomes permanent, it could discourage over 1.5 million working parents from staying employed, per University of Chicago scholars’ estimations. There are indications that Harris may pursue a covert UBI scheme through an expanded child tax credit, as suggested in the Biden-Harris budget for 2025.

Moreover, Senator Harris previously introduced a bill to allocate trillions of dollars for monthly UBI-style payments to most U.S. households during the pandemic. This proposed benefit, without work requirements and on top of existing public assistance programs, could have substantially augmented household spending, potentially exacerbating inflation.

It is evident from Harris’ past endeavors, like the LIFT Act in 2019, that her approach focuses on increasing financial support without emphasizing individual effort, choice, or personal empowerment. The government’s indefinite financial assistance could inhibit motivation for self-improvement through career advancement.

Contrary to these proposals, data indicates that a more effective strategy to combat poverty is adopting the success sequence – obtaining education, securing full-time employment, and getting married before having children. This proven formula has shown to help individuals steer clear of poverty and secure a place in the middle class, regardless of race or age.

It remains uncertain if Harris, grounded in progressive politics, would endorse such traditional values as education, work, marriage, and parenthood in the preferred order. Current trends that downplay personal responsibility and delayed gratification may conflict with the success sequence’s principles essential for breaking out of poverty traps.

Rather than resorting to temporary fixes like UBI, promoting policies that champion self-reliance, delayed gratification, and personal responsibility is crucial for enabling individuals to build better lives for themselves and future generations. The focus should be on advocating the success sequence rather than solely relying on government interventions like cash transfers.