What I don't understand with BI is this: if you give everyone the same amount of money, won't prices and rents adjust accordingly by exactly that amount, thereby nulling the effect ?
Moving Forward on Basic Income
181–190 of 1001 posts
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#182Setting aside whether or not redistribution is ever justified, I do respect the pragmatism of the UBI granted it replaces all other forms of welfare. Faced with a choice between the current welfare state and a UBI, the latter is a no brainer. While not specifically a UBI, the negative income tax seeks to accomplish the creation of a similar safety net while still maintaining a strong profit motive for the people bene…
I think it's important to some degree to be agnostic about what we mean by 'basic income'. We're planning to test the version coloquially closest to 'universal basic income', but something along negative income tax could make sense -- we need to find the answers (hence doing the study!), not just prescribe what we think is right.
The specifics obviously matter.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?" Ideally you'd want UBI to increase with inflation. However, as the initial study is over 5 years the decrease in purchasing power by the end of the study is likely to be minimal. There is a risk that companies that service low-income people will increas…
There is a risk that companies that service low-income people will increase their prices faster than inflation, negating some of the benefits of UBI. The only guard I know of for this is strong competition and disciplined consumers, people have to be willing to express their dislike of price hikes by shopping elsewhere otherwise the system won't work. There are places where people don't have enough mobility to be abl…
> "There are places where people don't have enough mobility to be able to do this."
That's where Internet shopping comes in. Ideally you want to support local businesses to keep jobs in the area, but if you need to fight against price hikes and can't do so locally then the best thing to do is shop online until the price hikes are reduced.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#184What impact does UBI have on technology and companies?
In theory I suppose more people will be able to afford a basic phone, banking, transportation etc so more eyeballs on ads and users of services. By getting out of the poverty trap, more people can be employed so even more expendable income on technology.
Will companies pay their employees less if their basic needs are covered? Then automation would be less of a cost advantage. Cheaper labour could mean a shift of manufacturing back to the US?
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#185This is outrageous. Look at how this people lobby to the State to take money out of others pockets against their will and still appear to the media as a benefactor of some kind.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#186So, a question for the BI fans: I've seen it said repeatedly that BI will save us money (or at least, not be so outrageously expensive) in part because we can eliminate existing welfare programs. "Just cut a single check, no more overhead from several agencies", they say. But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all th…
> flat-out blows all their money and now can't afford rent and/or food? Well for starters I'd imagine a future BI system to handle something like rent via direct transfer to the landlord. Food handled the same way, some prepaid debit card that only works at grocery stores, etc. I don't envision a system where people pick up a stack of 20's with a post-it note on it that says "remember to pay your rent".
What you're describing is conditional cash transfers. We have that in the US already (public housing vouchers, food stamps). BI is an unconditional cash transfer. It really is more like a stack of 20s.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#187So, a question for the BI fans: I've seen it said repeatedly that BI will save us money (or at least, not be so outrageously expensive) in part because we can eliminate existing welfare programs. "Just cut a single check, no more overhead from several agencies", they say. But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all th…
I think as long as they don't get into debt, it should be okay if they blow all their money on drugs and alcohol or whatever once or twice. Maybe they end up sleeping on the street for a few weeks, but I think there's only so much you can to help people who are totally self destructive. There should still be addiction programs that would be covered by universal health insurance to help people who do this sort of thing regularly.
I think to prevent 'payday loan' types of scams, a good fix would be to make these payments totally unrecoverable by debt collectors. Maybe people might still loan 50 or 100 dollars, but they would just be throwing away money if they loaded you up with thousands of dollars worth of debt.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#188Has anyone considered "subsidizing jobs" as an alternative to BI? Would it work better if the government gives $X to a company when they hire someone?
The real idea behind basic income is not efficiency, it's marxism.
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#189This shit again.
NO ONE has given me an answer to the question: what will happen when basic income inevitably raises the overall price of basic stuff because now "everyone can afford it"?
It will be back to zero, people with basic income will not be able to afford both housing/bills and food. Moreover the ones without will be totally fucked.
So, what gives? Run BI in a few small counties and call it a success? Gee wouldn't BI supporters love that...
Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I'd hope the system would absolutely tell them "tough shit". There's got to be a line where the safety net gives out, because someone is too expensive to help. That's where family and charity hopefully take over. At the same time, I think your instinct is right, and it's something I've never heard mentioned before. It's almost inevitably that there'll then be the "food security" fund, and the "housing gua…
"Tough shit" sucks when parents blow their handout on lottery tickets and drugs, leaving their children in perpetual poverty.
> "Tough shit" sucks when parents blow their handout on lottery tickets and drugs, leaving their children in perpetual poverty.
Seems to me that with a universal unconditional benefit that is sufficient for adequate support of both parents and children (which, incidentally, I don't see as likely in any early-phase UBI, though over time it would hopefully grow to that level), failure to provide adequate support for children is, without exception, culpable neglect; interventions to address such neglect exist and are outside of the scope of the public benefit programs UBI would replace (though, if children are counted as beneficiaries with the benefits flowing to their legal guardian, you've dramatically simplified some aspects of the administration of those programs, as well, with a UBI.)