We'll be a lot better off when we realize that work is not an end in itself.
There's more than enough for everyone.
Society isn't going to collapse if someone doesn't want to work 75 hours a week at three different bullshit jobs.
Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
101–110 of 786 posts
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#102Something not talked about often, but I wonder if basic income might lower the "applicability" of what people spend their time on. I know if money were not an issue I'd spend my time working on projects that sound fun, but might not have a path to profitability. Money, besides being a motivator is also a signal to markets on what people want.
I've had a few landlords that just don't have any job at all and just ride off their cash flow. Boomer landlords of mine especially who got in on the property early before the market swelled in the last few decades just live like freespirited hippies. No other job, engaging in art or creative things, eating and drinking around town with their partner, and smoking a lot of weed. Even with this decadent living on their end and supposed enlightened disposition, getting simple repairs is still like pulling teeth.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#103I strongly suspect that the lion's share of UBI would go directly to landlords or existing property owners.
Not if it was paid for by a tax on rental income. 100% tax on everything over the equivalent mortgage payment on the property would be a lovely cap on rent values.
There are some benefits to being a tenant, but your proposal would basically make it impossible, since your landlord would have to be losing money.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
UBI might cover your food and rent, but it won't cover much past that. So if you want some beer money or a new videogame or whatever, you'll need to work. And since after UBI every dollar after taxes goes to luxuries, a low income provides a lot more luxuries than it does before UBI, so it's actually a lot more appealing to work -- you see the benefits directly.
Are you saying you'd be more encouraged to work to buy a video game than to not be homeless? Why wouldn't regular minimum wage workers just be homeless and spend their money on luxuries if this was the case?
I'm saying that the work wouldn't be so mentally tedious. You're working because you want to be there because the reward is tangible. The difference between working because you have to and because you want to is massive, even if the work is the same.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#105I strongly suspect that the lion's share of UBI would go directly to landlords or existing property owners.
This is true, which is why UBI would have to be combined with housing reform. Both are doable and needed.
One of my favourites is to encourage cooperative housing and to have the government become a landlord itself, but with rents capped to a share of income. This way, the government would have an incentive to make the system more efficient and to make more and better public housing, as the money would go back to the government budget and they would be able to lower taxes as a result. At the same time, the private housing market will have to compete. The idea of allowing the government to make a reasonable profit as measured by outcomes to the consumer is very successful for many endeavors, and it makes it very unpopular to cut public services as it would necessitate a tax increase. We have done this in Quebec with Hydro-Quebec and, unlike many crown corporations, it has resisted privatization, while still providing the best prices to the consumer in the world for electricity, without any subsidies (as it generates net profit for the government), and many very good jobs.
Beyond this, it has caused cascading positive externalities not only in Quebec but throughout the world - as it has pioneered mass production techniques of LiFePO4 battery technology that is now becoming dominant for EVs, greatly improved brushless hub motor technology which is now used in many low-cost EVs, and facilitated the construction of renewable energy projects.
This however requires a large change in ideology, as current neoliberal and neoconservative dominant ideologies not only refuse to admit the fact that the government can provide a better overall service than the free market, but are deathly afraid of allowing state owned enterprises to compete with private businesses as a matter of principle. This limits the scope of solutions to many problems.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#106A link to the actual research paper would be helpful. In this experiment, what amount was given to the treatment group that received basic income? How often? How does that amount compare to the cost of living in their city? > ‘It’s sometimes said that people will sit around doing nothing if you give them free money.’ I’m not an academic, so take this with a grain of salt. If my job requires menial labor or involves g…
I also think in general all the research around basic income misses an incredibly important piece that is being proposed in policy changes.
Basic income experiments usually game it like this: We will give you x years of payments monthly for just being alive.
Then they see what happens. The problem is, policy has one huge difference. It doesn't end.
The difference between, I'll give you 2 years of payments monthly and then you'll have to take care of yourself the rest of your life is extraordinarily different than, I'll give you monthly inflation adjusted payments for life, there will be no point in the future when you will need to take care of yourself again.
Think about the FIRE movement. People are working to create an early retirement for themselves with the government not offering it. There will certainly be a percent of the population who retires with basic income.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#107I strongly suspect that the lion's share of UBI would go directly to landlords or existing property owners.
Not if it was paid for by a tax on rental income. 100% tax on everything over the equivalent mortgage payment on the property would be a lovely cap on rent values.
There's not an objective number for that. But if we assume there is, then you are simply guaranteeing that no rentals will exist, because landlords pay higher taxes than a resident mortgagor, and they have overhead.
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#108Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#109I think it would change how long people are willing to work and what people are willing to do for work.
For example, I could imagine less desirable jobs would see a drastic increase in market wages because there would be less people in the position of needing to take any job they can get to scrape by. Undoubtedly a good thing!
However, if it costs more money to get basic things done like cleaning and stocking grocery stores prices would inevitably increase to compensate for the added labor costs. How long before the basic income is not enough to cover basics and then it is increased? The whole process then repeats.
So sure, people still work and occupy their time but are they doing things that are valuable? Am I missing something?
Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work
#110Behavioral experiments by a cognitive psychologist…
I’m sure this wasn’t done in the field or over an extended period of time.
The only way to truly observe the effects would be historical analysis of similar conditions like unemployment or in extreme cases, socialism.
Such things are fairly well documented and don’t require branches of philosophy to run pseudoscientific studies on