this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
289 points (96.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27205 readers
1687 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Not_mikey 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (5 children)

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.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 6 points 6 days ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Not_mikey 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

that's why when aggregate demand goes up and supply stays fixed, such as with housing, prices go up.

Why would supply stay fixed? People can and do build new housing, especially when aggregate demand goes up.

Like I said, market forces don’t go away.

[–] Not_mikey 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Demand goes up but not production. Adding UBI doesn't increase the amount of wood harvested, or bricks produced or construction workers. In fact some construction workers may quit and go on UBI, lowering the production.

If demand goes up without production increasing, and thus supply, prices go up. This is part of the reason for the latest round of inflation, demand shot up after the pandemic but production was still at pandemic levels and yet to ramp back up.

Production in a lot of other places can ramp up relatively quickly to match demand if the infrastructure is built out already. In housing though production in general is slow and also slow to ramp up. It can take 2-3 years to build a house, and housing production takes years to increase. That's part of the reason housing is still so high right now, housing production plummeted after 2008 and we haven't gotten back to that even though prices and demand has skyrocketed.

All this is to say if UBI goes in it'll take years for the supply to increase, I think they're estimating housing production won't get up to match the current new high prices now until 2030. Meanwhile your landlord is increasing your rent as soon as you renew, and rents don't tend to ever go down after they're set. This is if new housing can be built at all, a lot of places in America are zoned for single family housing and all the land is taken so no new housing can be built, housing production is limited by desirable and developable land and that just doesnt exist in a lot of places.

This is all if you don't increase production, which the government can do, but they don't right now and they definitely won't if UBI comes in and replaces section 8 and all other welfare. If you do a universal jobs program though you can use those people to build affordable and public housing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)