$750 a month was given to homeless people in California. What they spent it on is more evidence that universal basic income works.
$750 a month was given to homeless people in California. What they spent it on is more evidence that universal basic income works.
Trickle-down doesn't work. Trickle-up does.
You want rich people to have more money? Distribute funds to people, and let business compete for those new customers.
I'm good with either Trickle-up or Middle-out. Anything is better than Trickle-down and that people still believe that con is ridiculous. If anyone advertises Trickle-up, it should instantly be a sign to not trust that person.
Wouldn't it be great... People would no longer need to work two jobs to survive, heck some might just stop working altogether - which is great, as it creates an undersaturated job market where employees have way better footing to negotiate.
The only people this doesn't benefit are the uber-wealthy who rely on people needing to work in order to bleed them dry - and for that reason alone, it may very well never come to fruition. Bloody shame ain't it.
Almost like "turning the bull loose" caused irreparable systemic damage.
Accidentally appropriate metaphor.
I still worry that prices would compensate for the additional income simply for added profit. We see it already without UBI.
I want to believe in UBI. How do we combat this?
You don't give people cash, you give them what they need. It's the unfortunate part of UBI.
But isn't that the "I" in UBI? Income. Cash?
You give people cash with the idea that they know how best to utilize it. You simplify all other forms of assistance (SNAP, rent assistance, etc) and just give everyone cash.
Yes, some people will still need more assistance until they can figure out how to best utilize that money, but the idea is that will not be the majority.
And to clarify it is not "just that easy", but that's the general concept as I understand.
Nah. The price will keep low to fit in with the UBI. If the price are too high people will simply not buy. It has even a positive effect on the salary. People will work for more money as you reverse the power. People will work but if it give them a good amount of money otherwise they will use the UBI. The capital can't have capitalize as it does actually. It will be a lot less in favor of the worker. It change the entire dynamic on peut to see a worker, a price, etc.
This is partly why the corporations don't like the idea. They will lose a lot of power with a new actor.
That's not how money works. It would cause massive inflation
Would it? Or would the egg companies just collude to increase prices opportunistically?
That's just called being insatiably greedy, antisocial, profiteering, opportunistic sociopaths "Rational Self-Interest!"
We have always been at war with Eurasia, after all.
I mean they still might but the value of the US dollar would go down.
UBI is a redistribution of money, not a creation of money. The net total is the same, so in theory there is no inflation.
Don't worry, the Fed Can just incentivize laying off workers again if the benevolent, job creating dragons start getting concerned about the value of their hoards, or if laborers gain too much leverage against the owners again. They'll protect the economy from the people and society it's supposed to be a mere, lowly tool to serve by facilitating distribution of goods and services.
Protect whims of that tail from that mean old dog!
Why? Because of increased demand for goods and services? That might cause a minor blip while production adjusts. Oh you mean that the government would run a deficit? We’ve been running massive deficits for decades, basically since WW2 started. Inflation is demonstrably independent of those deficits.
More massive than we're already experiencing because practically every major corporation decided to jack up prices based on the fact that bigger numbers exist?
Now this is the way the trick works
https://libcom.org/article/great-money-trick-robert-tressell
that's not how inflation works. or central banking. or whatever you mean.
Can you elaborate? do you think California is creating money to do this?
"But I go to work and barely scrape by! UBI isn't fair!"
-Americans who've been propagandized by the wealth class to resent the even more powerless and victimized people below them than even considering getting angry at the little club above them keeping them scraping by.
I don't know how we'll get past that mindset. So many bloodthirsty Americans rooting against eachother economically.
Comic was about immigrants, but applies easily to homeless, minimum wage workers vs. Slightly less exploited workers, on and on. That's what they do. It fucking works on many if not most who refuse to understand common cause, rugged individuals that we are.
Working people would also get UBI. Most likely taxes would go up, making their paycheck smaller. But then they're getting UBI. Ideally this would result in the majority of stable, permanent workers getting the same pay from 2 different sources. With richer people getting less and poorer people getting more.
Lots of workers would stop working, and that's OK. That will mean certain industries will have to pay more. UBI will result in people working just to not starve or die of exposure a thing of the past. And let me tell you, capitalists and business with FIGHT this to hell and back. It removes a huge cudgel from workers.
But more realistically, UBI will probably start with a below-basic income level subsidy for homeless and jobless to help house and keep people in houses. Kind of like unemployment, but it actually works long-term.
I'm fully aware friend. I'm not arguing the merits, multiple successful studies, or the desperate need.
My point is how do we convince the poor, deluded, beaten dog people to vote for leaders promising to enact this policy? Can't you already hear the ignorant screams of "TROJAN HORSE COMMUNISM!!!!!" Yes, fully aware its not.
How do we sell this on a bumper sticker? A paragraph won't help with most Americans.
Thankfully young people don't buy it. The question is what happens before we're in charge.