Hello, I’m not that informed about UBI, but here is my arguement:

Everyone gets some sort of income, but wouldn’t companies just subside the income by raising their prices? Also, do you believe capatilism can co-exist with UBI?

  • @steeznson
    link
    32 hours ago

    I am a moderate supporter of UBI. Strongly support “negative income taxing” which is a bit more techy but essentially your income is topped up if it falls below a certain level as opposed to everyone getting a lump sum each month whether they need it or not.

  • @Sludgeyy
    link
    214 hours ago

    Let’s say 50k is average income

    Basic income is 10k

    The average person would get 10k in UBI but pay 10k more in taxes

    They will have 50k dollars

    Someone that makes 100k would get the 10k in UBI but would have to pay 20k more in taxes.

    They will have 90k dollars

    Someone making 15k (federal min wage) would get 10k in UBI and pay nothing in taxes

    They will have 25k dollars

    This is simplified, but the idea is that all three people still made 165k combined. Just the person at the bottom got some help.

    UBI does not increase the total amount of money in the economy. Just moves it from the rich to the poor.

    The average person is still going to have the same spending power

    UBI only exists to solve a problem of capitalism. Other systems could have a UI like communism. But it’s the flaws of capitalism that needs it to correct itself.

    Social programs exist in capitalism and have existed for years. They are just a complex way of solving a basic problem. “How do we get poor people money?”

    Personally, I’d be for UBMI (Universal Bare Minimum Income). Everyone should be provided bare minimum from the society. Food, water, shelter, etc. If you can afford to pay it back, great, if you can’t, that’s fine too. But when people talk about UBI it’s always “how much??”. And it should be the bare minimum to survive and not be forced to run the capitalism rat race. If you’re content to sit in a small shelter and eat 3 meals a day, the government should give it to you. The government gives it to people who break the law and are no where near as deserving

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12 hours ago

      Would this communism have money? If so, what’s the purpose of the money?

      If people are choosing to buy things, that’s a free market and it’s not communism. If people are forced to buy specific things, it’s not really buying.

      If people are free to buy certain things but new people aren’t allowed to enter the market with new products, that’s just worse than capitalism.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 hours ago

        If so, what’s the purpose of the money?

        Barter and trade will always be part of humanity unless we somehow manage post-scarcity. Money is so far the best way we’ve found to manage and track the value of things for that system.

        If people are choosing to buy things, that’s a free market

        No, it’s just a market, and even then that’s not a guarantee at all. It could be that people just trade money for valuables amongst themselves, or other systems I’m too stupid to conceive of

        If people are forced to buy specific things, it’s not really buying

        Yes, it is? Its only not buying if you don’t trade money for it, ie the government sending it to everyone for free

        If people are free to buy certain things but new people aren’t allowed to enter the market with new products, that’s just worse than capitalism.

        Good thing that’s not anyone’s suggestion

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    42 hours ago

    Yes I’m in favor of UBI.

    I think capitalism would survive just fine with UBI.

    I don’t think prices would automatically cancel out the money, because prices are still subject to competition.

    As for whether people would still work after their basic needs are met, obviously. The evidence is people who are beyond subsistence and still seeking more money.

  • @zxqwas
    link
    23 hours ago

    It’s an interesting idea but I’d like to see it tried somewhere else on a large scale first.

    You could cut down or outright remove various government assistance programs so there would not necessarily be more money for the poor, just not a bureaucracy to figure out if you qualify for this and that assistance.

    Yes, it could coexist. Not sure why you’d think it would not. I still want more than a cubicle apartment and cheapest food.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 hours ago

      It’s an interesting idea but I’d like to see it tried somewhere else on a large scale first.

      It has been, Google is your friend

      So far it’s basically always a good idea

  • @x00z
    link
    English
    64 hours ago

    I support UBI.

    But then we should also change the way job contracts work. Because currently, “work” is mostly considered to be some 40 hour stressful thing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    I’ve soured on it recently, if you gave everyone $1000 a month then your landlord is just going to raise your rent by $1000.

    If full socialism is out of the picture, and we could enact something like UBI I think we should expand disability and social security for those who can’t work and then do a universal guaranteed jobs program for those who can work because:

    1. It’s way more politically viable. It’s going to be almost impossible to convince a majority of Americans to “pay people to sit around all day”. They’d be way more open to it if they’re doing a job.

    2. We could use the labor on fields that the market doesn’t value, such as building green infrastructure or social work for low income individuals. This would go along with expanding the definition of a job to any work that is benefiting society. If you’re a parent spending all your time caring for a young or disabled child then that’s a job and you should get paid for it.

    3. It you increase the wage for these guaranteed jobs that effectively raises the minimum wage since the private employers have to compete with the government. Why work at McDonald’s for $10 an hour when the government is paying $15. If you raise UBI that may decrease wages as employers will use it as an excuse to pay less.

    4. Even for people making above minimum wage it gives the worker more bargaining power since your employer loses the threat of throwing you onto the streets. This is also true for UBI but only if it’s enough to fully cover a comfortable life which I don’t think will happen due to the inflation it may cause.

    5. It increases production which can help to increase supply and cover for the increase in demand giving people that much money will cause so inflation is checked more.

    6. People neeed a job, as in the expanded definition I gave above, it’s a big part of how people make meaning in there life. The best case for someone not working would be they just play video games all day, worst case they turn to drug use.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      52 hours ago

      then your landlord is just going to raise your rent by $1000

      Then I’ll move and his income drops to zero. Market forces don’t disappear just because there’s UBI.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 hour ago

        It won’t drop to zero since someone else will come in who will give them the extra $1000 because they need a place to live. Market forces don’t dissappear with UBI, that’s why when aggregate demand goes up and supply stays fixed, such as with housing, prices go up.

        Say you pay $1500 for rent and there’s another guy who pays $1200 and wants to upgrade to your apt. They get the $1000 UBI and now they have enough to bid up to $2200 for your apt. Now either you pay $2300 or your landlord evicts you to get the higher paying tenant. This percolates up and down the housing ladder from the homeless person who gets $1000 only to see rents increase to $1500 to the millionaire who now has to pay an extra $1000 drop in the bucket for there high-rise in Manhattan.

        In capitalism your standard of living is determined by your ability to outbid the person on the rung below you to maintain that lifestyle. If everyone moves up a rung then nothing changes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      155 minutes ago

      I’ve soured on it recently, if you gave everyone $1000 a month then your landlord is just going to raise your rent by $1000.

      UBI empowers tenants and alternate living situations.

      1. Every neighbourhood is instantly gentrified. That can be higher rents, but its good for shopping deserts and no crime.
      2. You have “move out” money if the landlord is an asshole.
      3. Renting rooms to people is lower risk because you know they can pay.
      4. Home ownership, is more bankable because you have income security independent of your job. Again, subleting/renting parts of home is easier if you lose your job.
      5. You can move to brand new area, including lower cost “ghost town” areas without having a job lined up first.
      6. If you don’t want to work, you don’t really need to be living in high cost city. Smaller/cheaper towns look fine.

      Sure people will want nicer places to live, but there’s more options than renting with UBI, and other power dynamics that permit tenants to escape due to other options.

  • Captain Aggravated
    link
    fedilink
    English
    206 hours ago

    In my mind, a UBI would replace a lot of welfare and retirement programs and would absorb much of their budget. What would we need the whole food stamps system for if we guarantee everyone an income? What would we need social security for if you have your Universal Basic Income?

    Since it’s universal, we can do away with all those systems we have to make sure you “deserve” it. We can eliminate entire data centers, close entire offices. Those people (mostly office worker accountant types) can go work in some other part of the government like school systems, the FDA, the FAA, something that actually helps make society go. That should free up some budget.

    Do an actual goddamn audit of the Pentagon, if we find some bullshit pet projects we don’t actually need costing taxpayers billions of dollars we bust a general down to recruit and find or invent a way for him to die for his country.

    Capitalism may not be able to survive alongside a UBI but I think a largely free market economy can. I’ll always have my housing and food needs bet but I’d like to have an Xbox so I’ll go get a job to get money to pay for one.

    • @cymbal_king
      link
      43 hours ago

      Agreed! I feel like public discourse often forgets these efficiencies when talking about UBI. Include social security and education financial assistance and the numbers really add up.

      The COVID-era stimulus checks and PPP “loans” proved its possible to provide a package this large, would just need to offset the spending with increased taxes on the wealthy to make it sustainable long term.

    • @Usernameblankface
      link
      06 hours ago

      Oh no, I can already hear the whining about “but (insert type of person the speaker doesn’t like) don’t deserrrrve an income!” If we can outvote the bootstrappers and rugged individualists, we can see this thing happen.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    8
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    UBI is the only solution to our corrupt politics. It disempowers the state and empowers individuals. You can stop relying on promises from fake heroes to help the poor, and completely eliminate poverty and crime.

    AI and robotics is often cited as a catalyst for UBI. But it is deeply connected to political corruption. Our asshats will tell you that tech oligarchy deserves all our money, and nationalism means our weapons, oil oligarchs need to be given the rest of our money, and what little US manufacturing there is, needs to be protected so that you pay through the nose for stuff. All of this is BS. Let robotics/AI/China deliver us cheap stuff, and UBI afford not only to buy the cheap stuff, but let us have our time freed up in order to design/sell even more productively made stuff/tech that can improve the lives of those who will pay us for it.

    UBI does not stop the rich from getting richer. It grows economy significantly, and all money trickles up to the rich. UBI does disempower the rich from stealing your money, through war and war posturing. AI, without UBI, needs to be weaponized as national security that includes the same media disinformation on your tolerance for warmongering empire that makes you/us poorer.

    Every disgusting demonic evil inflicted on Americans by politicians is entirely the result of oppression and fearmongering to support unethical evil out of fear of homelessness, and healthcare access. You cannot support a sustainable world if society is on the verge of collapse and there is some war you idiotically are made to tolerate. Misery gives you no time to cure your stupidity. UBI frees us all into doing something useful instead desperately clinging to a job that does not produce anything worthwhile or competitive. 5 recruiter calls per day offering you a better job cures your stupidity.

  • missingno
    link
    fedilink
    649 hours ago

    While I’d prefer to fully dismantle the whole capitalist system, I can accept UBI as the most realistic compromise we’re likely to get in our lifetimes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      54 hours ago

      I’d be happy to see our kids get it in their lifetime - I lost hope to see it myself with how backwards my country is

  • palordrolap
    link
    fedilink
    66 hours ago

    A few days ago, I saw a post about negative income tax which is something that had occurred to me independently. Wasn’t surprised to learn that someone with more brains had actually given it some serious thought and that it had an actual name.

    That would be the sort of thing I’d be interested in being implemented, so that those who are on little to no income - especially those who can’t simply “get a (better) job” for whatever reason - don’t fall below the poverty line.

    This is not to say that the UK benefits system (where I am) doesn’t work at all, but it’s often coupled with the expectation of getting the recipient back into work or to getting a better job where you don’t need them any more.

    It would be nice if that part went away.

  • .Donuts
    link
    369 hours ago

    Here’s a good breakdown: https://econreview.studentorg.berkeley.edu/unboxing-universal-basic-income/

    As for my thoughts, yes there would be a noticeable impact at first, but UBI would help stabilise and strengthen the economy in the long term because purchasing power and demand will increase. If supply can keep up, prices won’t go up. Companies can’t just raise prices as that’s called price fixing. Antitrust laws should be there to prevent that, but your mileage may vary depending on your country. That means that if some companies decide to raise prices because of more purchasing power, some smart company is going to charge less to gain more market share. So we’re still doing capitalism, but there’s a social safety net.

    Also, people will still go to work to find purpose. Except “work” in this case could mean the freedom and flexibility to contribute locally, or take higher risks like entrepreneurship or becoming an artist.

    • Karyoplasma
      link
      fedilink
      15
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      That means that if some companies decide to raise prices because of more purchasing power, some smart company is going to charge less to gain more market share.

      Here is how this turns out in reality: Company A raises prices because they are greedy bastards. Company B is then impressed with the sheer display of dominance by A and raises prices accordingly to “keep up”.

      Your thinking is correct and that’s how it should work, maybe it even did in the 60s, but it just isn’t the case anymore.

      • @DomeGuy
        link
        127 hours ago

        You’re forgetting “customers see how much prices are up, and just stay home” or “company C, looking to break in, undercuts A and B and changes the market.”

        A real UBI is a great fix for capitalism, since it makes “f it, I’ll just stay at home” possible.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          10
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Your first example only works for goods that are completely optional, which is very rarely the case. For example, smartphones. Nobody technically needs one, but almost everyone in western countries has one. If every company that makes a smartphone increases their prices, people will still buy them because they basically need them. I believe this is the principle of inelastic demand (or low elasticity) – car fuel is a more traditional example.

          Your second example doesn’t work when the cost of entry into the market is really high. This is very common in high tech. Take semiconductors for example. There’s basically one big name in chip manufacturing (TSMC) and a few runner-ups (Samsung, Intel, etc.). The latest node is infamous for being very expensive and low capacity. Why aren’t there new competitors constantly breaking in to the market?

          UBI is a great idea and will help things, but it’s not perfect so we shouldn’t expect it to just completely fix capitalism. The best way to fix capitalism is to get governments (which are all in charge of capitalism) to fix it with regulations. UBI will be a major regulation/step in the right direction.

      • .Donuts
        link
        48 hours ago

        Company A raises prices because they are greedy bastards. Company B is then impressed with the sheer display of dominance by A and raises prices accordingly to “keep up”.

        When there’s a dozen manufacturers, they won’t all do it. As I mentioned, this is price fixing and illegal in a lot of countries.

        Secondly, what’s stopping someone from creating another company to undercut all of those greedy bastards to corner the market?

        • partial_accumen
          link
          98 hours ago

          When there’s a dozen manufacturers, they won’t all do it. As I mentioned, this is price fixing and illegal in a lot of countries.

          They can’t coordinate together to fix prices, but there is nothing legally stopping them from watching each other’s public behavior and adjusting their pricing to match.

        • @shonn
          link
          28 hours ago

          All B has to do is not raise their prices as much as A.