The Next Stage of Civilisation — Universal Basic Income, done globally, Education, Shelter, Technology, Health, and Food.
Table of Index
1. Some Facts
2. First World Poverty — United States
3. What is Universal Income?
4. Disclaimer
5. Rethink UBI as an investment with a measurable ROIC
6. Instead of a handout of money, do a handout of Value
7. A case for the needy
8. A case for everyone
9. Identity Management
10. Why tie the payout to PPP?
11. Connectivity
12. Destressing
13. Conclusion
14. Future Options
This article will discuss and analyze the institutional drivers of poverty and how we can truly solve it with a healthy Return on Invested Capital (ROIC). (Draft 2 — Update 10 Dec 2024, Draft 1–7 Nov, 2022)
We as human beings stand at a pivotal point in our civilization’s evolution. As we slowly approach the technological sophistication that could classify us as a Type I civilization on the Kardashev Scale, we face a sobering dichotomy: our technological capacities are surging, yet our societal maturity and inclusivity lag behind. The advent of the internet, global trade, now AI and profound innovations in information and communication technology have connected us more than ever. Still, fundamental inequalities and poverty remain entrenched worldwide.
This article provides a structured debate and suggests a strategic, investment-based approach to what is commonly known as Universal Basic Income (UBI). The goal is to spark critical thought: can we design a UBI that directly provides value — essential goods, education, connectivity — instead of just money? And can this be done in a financially and socially sustainable way that elevates humanity’s collective baseline, thus unlocking greater innovation and productivity?
The cold facts
Before discussing UBI or any solution framework, let’s establish some factual baselines. It is neither wise nor productive to simply say, “let’s hand out money.” Instead, we need to clarify what we aim to provide, how it will create quantifiable returns, and why such returns matter.
As global output of goods and services increases — driven by innovation, automation, and digital connectivity — millions remain trapped in poverty. According to the World Bank, about 9.2% of the global population (approximately 689 million people) lives under the international extreme poverty line of $1.90 per day (2017 PPP figures). This is not just a moral shortfall; it represents a massive loss of human potential. If these individuals had the capacity to develop skills, innovate, and participate fully in the global economy, we could see a surge in productivity and intellectual contributions — so-called “Lost Einstein’s”.
First World Poverty — United States
Poverty is not confined to low-income countries. Even in the United States, roughly 10.5% of the population (over 34 million people) lives below the U.S. poverty line. This “first world poverty” highlights that while aggregate wealth grows, its distribution and the societal frameworks that enable upward mobility remain imperfect.
This raises the important question, what drives poverty?
We know in the Abject Poverty section:
- 70% aged above 15 are considered extremely poor and do not have schooling
- Poverty is regionally concentrated; even if we consider first-world countries and relative poverty, it is also concentrated in specific suburbs.
- 40% of the Extremely Poor are in regions subject to economies driven by conflict, violence, and fragility.
- Around 19.2% of the Extremely Poor live in high flood-risk areas
New Poverty, like in countries like the USA, becomes more urbanized and focuses on specializations and labor frameworks. This also fits into a general trend of a poverty cycle, where most of the new generation from these areas also end up in poverty due to a lack of support.
For our world to prosper, the Intrinsic Value based measurement of net worth through time for everyone should increase by a certain %. For example, in simple terms, the real growth in net worth for the entire world population, if segmented into 10% population deciles based upon income, each group should have a net positive growth rate in wealth year on year. So the context of the rich getting richer is acceptable if the poor also get slightly richer due to the trickle-down of innovation and wealth. Why? We have to define what considers success in wealth.
This is where the drivers beyond the basic facts become important, including opportunity equality and other such forces of civilization. Now let’s discuss Universal Income in this context.
What is Universal Income?
Universal basic income (UBI) generally refers to a government program where every adult citizen receives a set amount of money regularly. Here, we propose rethinking UBI globally, not merely as a handout but as an integrated framework that distributes foundational value: connectivity, education, essential goods, and services. By doing so, UBI becomes a global investment in human capital, rather than a simplistic wealth transfer.
Disclaimer:
Before we begin, we first draw a line on communism or socialistic political perception. Just because I advocate for UBI, I still strongly support Capitalism because I believe that it is the most ideal philosophy capable of bringing our humanity to the next level. UBI works hand in hand with Capitalism. I will write further to explain why?
Rethink UBI as an investment with a measurable ROIC
Now we get that out of the way, Universal Income, instead of allocating it as a redistribution of wealth, we should classify it as a strategic macro investment. This changes the entire framework of philosophy. Now, why is it a strategic investment for the wealthier?
Simple, if more people are moved out of poverty, that means there is more thinking power beyond the “how do I get food on the table?”, to get out of poverty also implies there will be more skills available increasing productivity per hour of the elevated populous. This means globally, for everyone, there will be statistically more probability of inventors and innovators coming out, more Elon Musk and Stephen Hawkings. Also more Software Engineers, Physicists ETC.
The output will also increase along with efficiency, and this will generally create more abundance following the last century of trend, and in countries like China, making everything cheaper; not just that, the circulation of value will fast track as consumption increases. It is in our self-interest to support the poor, so we can live more comfortably in the future.
There are more reasons, such as a reduced risk of killing ourselves as a species; if there is less poverty, there will be a natural aversion to conflict, as the loss philosophy comes in. There will also be more education in thought, allowing room to care about the bigger picture. This can even be measured.
Instead of a handout of money, do a handout of Value
What does this mean? This means providing them with tools and teaching them how to use them, as money is not the solution here. This is the list:
- Internet Free basic tier through Satellite
- Basic Smartphones — Optional Opt-In
- Basic Laptops — Optional Opt-In
- Food and Water Payments
- Education Payments
- Shelter Payments
- Clothing
- Sanitation — Diapers, Tampons, and Condoms
So what does this look like? This means directly giving everyone a Free Internet Connection through Satellite (Elon Musk can help here), thus providing everyone free access to information and also allowing conflict zones to not have misinformation. Then provide the means to access this if people want to provide basic smartphones and laptops to every individual if they opt-in to buy, through a voucher for the specific device list, 100% subsidized.
This will instantly gain people access to information and knowledge and connect them to our global information network. But this is silly; if we do consider, they can sell it and get exploited? This is where ID safeguards and other such measures, like restriction on spending comes in.
So the next issue is Food; everyone needs to be given a daily voucher for food, where they can get ration. Monitored through a rule-based blockchain system, controlled through identity management and AI. After we have established this, we need to have retailers accept the food vouchers by phone-to-phone payment systems, which countries are already using when issuing vouchers during COVID-19.
We then need to have Education and Schooling finance for each country in terms of global schooling programs from Pre-School to Year 10, each curriculum standardized online with e-classes going all the way to master degree or even Ph.D. from Pre-School. Having free internet allows us to provide relatively cheap education at a high standard globally.
We also need to account for shelter, so a basic shelter cost needs to be accounted for and paid every month depending upon Purchasing Power (PPP). And with shelter, we need to provide basic health coverage, known as universal health care, for everyone under 40. Why? I am being brutal here, the expense will be too high otherwise, and the younger generation can be cultivated into a smarter population easier than the older, whose output has been consumed. Maybe in stage 2, consider above 40 because just convincing the entire world to agree on the above will be a nightmare due to politics.
We need to do this and restrict direct cash, as it reduces the risk of abuse, such as drugs and more. Also, targeting the direct needs of the people to empower them with equal opportunity. Now this means we have to provide a $ figure to adjust what each person requires to not be poor. The US poverty line sits at $35 USD; this is where I become lazy, and say assume this to be true in every country. Therefore we have ~7.7 billion people. Thus 7.7* 35 = $269.5 billion/ day expense or $98.367 trillion per year, which is not possible currently, but also shows how behind our civilization is if we cannot even afford this with global tax revenue! Why should this not be when more than 2 billion people go hungry at night while we launch rockets into space and spend trillions on pointless wars? -> But there is a point XYZ did XYZ.
So maybe the US poverty line is not affordable? Let's get some insights: global spending on defense is $2 trillion. Global world revenues are at least 82 Trillion (This is for trade only); as for global tax? ~6.15 Trillion in Europe, which is 1/6th and thus, ~37 Trillion globally.
What does this mean? We cannot afford the minimum of US poverty, so let's stop? No, let's instead change it into $35 per day per person or ~$99 (Round Up) trillion per year budget for Universal Subsidy is our aim in the next 50 years as a civilization.
So what can we afford now? Around ~41% in Europe and around ~27.8% for Australia is the total tax revenue in terms of GDP. Thus, I will use Australia as an example, as it is considered a really good economy by most. 16.3% of government expenditure is on health, or 82 billion, which is ~5% of GDP, and assume tax revenue is 100% spent equally, and we are not going to bother with debt (*Not exactly accurate, but it gets the point). It spends $ 191.8 billion on welfare, which is 35% of the budget, and a further 7.3% on Education. This implies a total of 16.3 + 35 + 7.3 = 58.6% of tax revenue spent on welfare.
In a global pool of funds, this implies a nation might be willing to spare realistically 2% of their tax revenue to a global welfare fund equally distributed according to PPP in every country's citizens directly. Why 2% looking at Australia spending 58.6%, it might be willing to give 3.5% of that to better causes arriving at 2% through calculated guess. Initially, I do not expect even 2% from countries. But the 10-year benefit will be reduced conflict and reduced defense spending. Thus, the offset of defense expenditure can offset UBI in the long term.
So what is 2%, clearly from above, that means 2% of 37 Trillion = 740 billion annual budget, which comes to a $96 annual income for everyone. Now you might say that is not viable; this will not do anything. This is where the fun parts of macro come in, as $96 means for everyone, including children.
So you package it as a household initially, will expand this to an average assumed family of four, then 96*4 = 384. An internet subscription cost of 1.925 billion households will be $50 annually at most per household. Coming at $96.25 Billion for the global internet annually is completely viable, especially with Starlink, considering economies of scale, and not the best internet, but good enough internet.
As it will only cost $10 billion for v1 infrastructure, we are willing to put $96.25 billion and allow countries' descriptions on their policies, for example, firewalls and censorship, to prevent politics, so let's give everyone cloud storage and services in this too. This leaves us with 643.75 billion dollars.
Now, remember equipment such as smartphones and mobile phones? Heard of debt? Yes, these will have a replacement life of 3 years, so giving it to all 7.7 billion people is silly, 25.49% or ~1.96 billion people are under the age of 14, so let’s not give this part a smartphone, also ~0.33 billion are under the age of 5, let’s exclude them from laptops.
This leaves 5.74 billion smartphones and 7.37 billion laptops, with a useful life of 3 years for each; an average smartphone/laptop with insurance costs around, around $150 for a good laptop at that much quantity, remember higher the quantity better the price for quality products, and $48 for a good smartphone. Paid over three years puts both prices at $50 / year for the laptop and $16 / year for the smartphone; yes, I chose 48 for easy numbers. This means a total of $91.84 billion will be spent on smartphones annually and a total of $368.5 billion on laptops. Making a total equipment expense of $460.34 billion with a remaining $183.41 billion in budget.
So we have given everyone free global courses recognized by all first world countries by providing laptops, smartphones, and internet; let's allocate the $30 billion to teachers and developers to create education modules for online universities and schools in all the languages with the mandatory global languages being English, Spanish, Mandarin, and Russian. So 2% of all global tax revenue allows us free education and information access.
This leaves $153.41 billion; we still have to tackle food, shelter, and health. Initially, we cannot cover health, but we can at least try food and shelter. This is assuming everyone opts in, with 7% of the world classified as high-income.
This will also unlock a bank account, micro-financing facility, government documentation, and more for everyone, as they will have a smartphone/laptop with a budget, including a solar battery pack, to ensure charging is taken care of.
A case for the needy
In the world, around 821 million people around the world do not have sufficient access to food and water, and 2 billion have had to deal with hunger. So let's classify by income and subsidize only those who require it, which means $153.41 billion is distributed amongst 689 million people below the extreme poverty line. That means many people are left out, but we do not have the budget. Thus providing $222.7 per person annually or 61 cents daily. If you then account for households, this is $890.80 issued per household on average, but as poverty has higher birth rates, we can assume even up to $1113.5 per household annually.
Being conservative, $890.80 per household with 61 cents daily will effectively lift most people out of extreme poverty. Yes, $1.95 is required daily but having 61 cents daily on top of what they earn, plus the technology, allows a substantial differential. Where the GDP per capita of a country like Nepal is only $1000, this makes a significant difference in empowerment.
A case for everyone
As health is complicated, let us target food, shelter, and sanitation for $153.41 Billion, with a mixed voucher per day, which can be redeemed for either. This puts a budget of $19.9 per annum for each person or $79.7 per household. This means each household will have 21 cents daily, which they can use.
While this might not necessarily mean anything in the context of a first-world country, you need to take into account, say India require $1959.24 per annum or ~$5.37 per day on food for a household for a middle-class income family with good groceries. There is a total of 1.925 billion households, putting an annual cost of $3.771 trillion to feed the world. By providing a 21 cents subsidy daily which accumulates to a total of ~$6.39 per month, we can subsidize food for 12 days for the entire population. This will not be the best approach, and only in the future can we aim for $5.37 per day, as the initial traction creates economic prosperity globally.
Remember those smartphones? Vouchers can only be redeemed from your unique smartphone with your five-point ID, fingerprint, image recognition, age, sex, and nationality/s. Thus resale of smartphones/laptops is prevented as they will not operate with blockchain-based biometrics being verified.
How do we incentivize participation when poor countries contribute less proportionally? This can be solved by giving GDP, and PPP per capita thresholds, where countries classified in the bottom tiers can exchange free trade treaties and other benefits to the richer countries. Or it will have to be weight-adjusted. Eventually, the weight is a deficit, which will have a future exchange of something X.
Identity Management
Before we tackle the concept of a global paycheck, we need to make a database with identity, where we can directly give the money and resources to each individual and avoid all the associated risks such as corruption and more. How we do, this is equally simple, through blockchain. Having an Identity Management System is critical to our civilization, as it proves who we are anywhere in the world. Being a global citizen, the use cases can be imagined, and the amount of paperwork it will solve can also be equally thought of.
Why tie the payout to PPP?
Purchasing power parity is an economic theory that compares different countries’ currencies through a “basket of goods” approach. This means how much a particular good costs in a country; this allows us to better provide the amount of money to each country, as it provides us with a baseline, not in terms of money, but in terms of affordability and maintaining fairness, as first world countries are naturally more expensive.
Connectivity
While countries will still have initiatives like Belt and Road, foreign aid, and more, just having 2% of the tax revenue of the world allows us to provide everyone with free internet, smartphone, education, and laptop and take a step towards the complete eradication of extreme poverty within the next ten years. This will significantly upgrade our civilization as it frees up resources and increases output. Also, providing technology in the hand of every individual and free education by leveraging e-classrooms allows the entire civilization to take a giant step towards resource abundance and accelerated innovation growth. Banking and bureaucratic participation are equally important, allowing it to happen, with ID systems tied to smartphones and computers allowing for free company formation and more. This will also allow better monitoring of those who require aid and their expense patterns.
Destressing
Once we achieve basic coverage and slowly meet over the next 20 years, the aim at $5.37 per person for food beyond the internet and technology will allow us to free up our societal burden of thinking short term to cover immediate needs. Allowing more people to pursue their true passions and interests leads to increased productivity due to reduced depression. It will incentivize corporates to pursue healthy work environments. While for some who are truly lazy, it is okay; we can subsidize their lack of output through the few cultivated minds who take our civilization forward, coming from opportunities we create in poor societal groups through this initiative.
The US, China (Japan + India + Russia), or Europe alone can fund this at less than 10% of their GDP, so why have we not done this? When it is in our best interest to bring people forward so our global output can be substantially multiplied and we as a race have more and more luxuries and entertainment? The answer is obvious; most do not think outside of their groups and short-term utility loss.
Conclusion
Nobody will be sitting around doing nothing if we provide them with free internet, computers, smartphones, food, education, and shelter. Why? Because analyzing the behavior of first world economies like Australia, where most of these things can be done with minimum wage, people still strive for more, a bigger house, dining out, luxury car, vacations, and more.
We are transforming into a consumption-based economy, where the value of money is tied to global output; as output efficiency increases, we spend more to consume more. As long as we have the greed, the above-mentioned UBI will allow us to pursue it, as it covers most areas. It is an investment into ourselves, as we can live a better life if more people can work at better efficiencies, increasing global output and feeding into our consumption.
It is time we get over our petty politics and personal short-term gain and do something so we can see the stars, live forever, and have robots serving our every need! This enables genius people, born poor and lost to us, to be given the wings they need to help propel our civilization forward faster. I can guarantee if we implement this within the next ten years, we will have 10X to 20X our global GDP in 30–50 years. The elasticity of poverty is around -2.59, and 25.9% investment in economic welfare will yield a 10% GDP growth, not considering technological and other empowerments, which will make it closer to a 1:1 yield. Almost a 100% return on investment. If you understand compound, we will pave the path of our future 50 years with a multiplier effect.
Future Options
To make it viable — the UN framework and policy will need to be created, a lot of specific research will need to be conducted, and a much smaller portion of GDP to have a staged approach will need to be taken. A framework for different stages will need to be followed, modeled, and implemented. This is simply to share the potential to solve and empower humanity. Also, to feature a discussion, I hope people can add to this and refine this. Will I be wrong? I am no expert, this will not be as simple as it seems, but we have to start. Maybe a localized initiative? There is allot of literature; on what we need to create a viable framework from existing research to accelerate a potential proposal. The issue will also come from the amount of participating countries and regulations.
Implications of AI (Added)
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into every layer of economic and social activity, it will both magnify and reshape the challenges and opportunities outlined in this proposal. On one hand, AI-driven automation, advanced data analytics, and predictive modeling can increase global productivity, usher in precision resource allocation, and enable more responsive governance. Through machine learning, we can tailor education to an individual’s learning style, forecast local needs for food and shelter, and dynamically adjust subsidies in real time. These intelligent systems could help reduce inefficiencies, identify corruption or misuse, and ensure that assistance is always being directed toward the greatest global good. Moreover, as AI handles many repetitive or dangerous tasks, people can focus on higher-level creative, interpersonal, or strategic work, thereby increasing the value of human capital unlocked by universal access to the foundational tools of civilization.
However, the widespread adoption of AI will not be without its complications. Societies that fail to adapt risk deepening existing inequalities, as workers displaced by automation might not have the means or skills to pivot to new fields. Without a universal baseline of connectivity, education, and support, AI could exacerbate the digital divide, leaving certain groups permanently behind. Properly implemented within a framework of global UBI-as-investment, AI can serve as a powerful equalizer — an engine that, when coupled with universal access to digital tools and training, creates new opportunities for innovation across the economic spectrum. By doing so, AI could help transition our civilization toward a more abundant, equitable, and stable global environment, accelerating human development and easing the path toward truly sustainable, inclusive economic growth. This is where UBI is critical — where everyone gets basic necessities Rich / Poor so even with automation there will be no framework chaos.
References
[1] World Bank Data: Global GDP Figures. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD
[2] OECD Global Revenue Statistics: Tax-to-GDP Ratios. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-ratios.htm
[3] One Laptop per Child (OLPC) historical data and TechCrunch articles on low-cost devices: OLPC: http://one.laptop.org/ and Market price discussions on low-cost smartphones.
[4] Estimates based on Starlink and other low Earth orbit constellations. Starlink’s current pricing is higher, but large-scale, heavily subsidized models could drive annual costs down as technology and competition increase. For scalable solutions, see ITU “Connecting the Unconnected” initiative: https://www.itu.int/
[5] World Bank: Poverty and Shared Prosperity reports for details on extreme poverty and its distribution. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/poverty-and-shared-prosperity
Contact: abhishek@finsoeasy.com
What do I do? Many things include running a manufacturing and construction company, running medical research project to emulate the human body, a spin off from which is creating a SaMD to solve the vision crisis. Doing cool things!
