Let's debate "UBI"

[anotherneil]

I know the Journal Nature has published material on the topic.

Money for nothing: the truth about universal basic income

Several projects are testing the idea of doling out funds that people can use however they want.

www.nature.com

Can you summarize it or something for your audience? It's behind a paywall.

 

[anotherneil]

Like I have said over and over, I am only familiar with the COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE. Not the UBI. Who knows, maybe I will qualify for UBI.

I don't care that you're only familiar with COLA. You're talking about something that's off topic. If you want to discuss COLA, please start your own thread for that. For this thread, kindly stick to the topic; thank you.

 

[Kfox]

Like I have said over and over, I am only familiar with the COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE. Not the UBI.

So why did you say they were the same on Post #2?

 

[Kathryn]

So why did you say they were the same on Post #2?

I didn't, though families do use the COLA whether they are working or not.

 

[Kathryn]

I don't care that you're only familiar with COLA. You're talking about something that's off topic. If you want to discuss COLA, please start your own thread for that. For this thread, kindly stick to the topic; thank you.

Families use COLA whether they are working or not.

 

[Kfox]

I didn't, though families do use the COLA whether they are working or not.

Who are these people in the military who do not work?

 

[Kathryn]

Sigh. I am not saying that UBI is the same thing as COLA. I am simply saying that military families use COLA whether they are working or not.

 

[Kfox]

Sigh. I am not saying that UBI is the same thing as COLA. I am simply saying that military families use COLA whether they are working or not.

But somebody in that family works; don't they?

 

[Kathryn]

But somebody in that family works; don't they?

Sure they do, but the family members may not. They often don't, in fact.

 

[Kfox]

Sure they do, but the family members may not. They often don't, in fact.

That's how all jobs work; usually at least one of the parents work, and everybody else doesn't have to. Rarely is there a case where every member of a family has a job.

 

[Heyo]

I'd support UBI if it came with some major incentives to get a job and work.

If those on UBI
- were not allowed to vote, no say in how tax $ is spent - it is not their money, not their say.
- were not allowed to buy alcohol or cigarettes etc. (something like food stamps, limited things you could buy with your UBI)
- were not allowed to buy land (only basic rental housing, basic food, basic public transportation)
- UBI should be given to everyone regardless of need. (Don't lose it if you get a job)

Allow it with major incentives to push people to work.
I do believe those who can work should work.

UBI for those who are still in school, for those with medical conditions, but there should be major incentives to get a job.

That wouldn't be an UBI. The idea of UBI is that it is unconditional.

 

[Heyo]

So if I live irresponsibly, (have a bunch of kids I can’t afford to support, live in an expensive city, buy things I can’t afford, etc.) do I get more income than my brother who lives a more financially responsible lifestyle?

Nope. UBI is universal. Even Bill Gates would get UBI.

Those people are the exception; they are usually business owners who are motivated to see their business grow. But those people are the exception to the rule. Most people work because they have to; those people laying bricks, flipping burgers over a hot grill, or doing road construction in 90 degree weather, those people are not toiling because they like toiling, they are working because they must work in order to live. If those people were given enough money to live without working, they would immediately quit their jobs. But those jobs are important, somebody has to work them. So in order to get someone to work those jobs, would require a massive increase in pay. This would result in that burger and fries that used to cost $8.00 will now cost $20.00. That plumber job that used to cost $200 to fix your pipes, will now cost $500 to fix your pipes. And since the UBI is based on the idea that a burger and fries costs $8.00 and Plumbers charge $200 to fix your pipes; which will mean the UBI will no longer cover your cost of living anymore. So what do you do?

Not only are you wrong (or at least not justified) in your assumption that most people would stop working (https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24312/w24312.pdf), you also haven't taken into account that people want more than having their basic needs met. People will most likely not stop working.
But you are right in the assumption that people will stop working in jobs that are underpaid, dangerous, or for other reasons not likely to be picked without need.
There will be slackers, there will be people who reduce their workload, there will be people who will become self-employed, working only on things they like or when they want to make a big purchase, but most people won't change their lives at all.
Who will have to change are employers, because it will be easier to walk out of a toxic work environment.

 

[Spice]

My concern is that it would just inflate the cost of living since "everybody" could afford to spend a bit more.

However, if it eliminates, as I've heard the original proposal stated it would, EBT, Medicaid, SSI, ect., perhaps it would encourage people to seek work because they would not be losing benefits by doing so, and therefore have hope in true improvement of financial security.

How many people don't even look for a job because they would lose benefits with no guarantee the job will hold or pay will improve? During that little trial of "Work First" where a paystub had to be shown in order to get certain benefits, I had a record number of hires that quit after one pay period. I started skipping over all applications with a record of extended unemployment.

 

[We Never Know]

Nope. UBI is universal. Even Bill Gates would get UBI.

Not only are you wrong (or at least not justified) in your assumption that most people would stop working (https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24312/w24312.pdf), you also haven't taken into account that people want more than having their basic needs met. People will most likely not stop working.
But you are right in the assumption that people will stop working in jobs that are underpaid, dangerous, or for other reasons not likely to be picked without need.
There will be slackers, there will be people who reduce their workload, there will be people who will become self-employed, working only on things they like or when they want to make a big purchase, but most people won't change their lives at all.
Who will have to change are employers, because it will be easier to walk out of a toxic work environment.

The more money people have, the higher cost of living goes.
That was partially shown through the free money given out during covid.

 

[Heyo]

The more money people have, the higher cost of living goes.

That is partly right, but UBI is not the creation of money out of thin air, it's only that money will be more evenly distributed.

That was partially shown through the free money given out during covid.

That is completely wrong. There have been much more factors that have driven prices during Covid. You conflate coincidence with causation.

 

[We Never Know]

That is partly right, but UBI is not the creation of money out of thin air, it's only that money will be more evenly distributed.

That is completely wrong. There have been much more factors that have driven prices during Covid. You conflate coincidence with causation.

The more money people have to spend, the higher cost of living trickles up.

Covid stimulus payments boosted/increased inflation up 2.6% or higher. Just google it.

 

[Kfox]

Nope. UBI is universal. Even Bill Gates would get UBI.

So how do you intend on stopping people from buying cars, houses, and alcohol with UBI?

But you are right in the assumption that people will stop working in jobs that are underpaid, dangerous, or for other reasons not likely to be picked without need.

But somebody has to do these jobs. Somebody has to lay bricks, pick tomatoes, or lay asphalt on hot days, and the only way you will be able to get someone to do it is by raising the wages which will increase the cost of living which will force you to raise the UBI to cover this cost of living, which will mean raising the wages of difficult jobs and the process repeats over and over again. IOW how do you get people to do jobs nobody wants to do?
Also concerning my second question; if Jim chooses a lifestyle where he needs to live in a 3 bedroom house in an expensive city, and Joe has a lifestyle where he lives in a 1 bedroom apt in a less expensive part of town, does Jim get more UBI than Joe due to his chosen lifestyle?

 

[Koldo]

But somebody has to do these jobs. Somebody has to lay bricks, pick tomatoes, or lay asphalt on hot days, and the only way you will be able to get someone to do it is by raising the wages which will increase the cost of living which will force you to raise the UBI to cover this cost of living, which will mean raising the wages of difficult jobs and the process repeats over and over again. IOW how do you get people to do jobs nobody wants to do?

Either the additional wage cost won't be significant enough to make a major difference on overall inflation or we have some very serious underlying problem where the economy relies on quasi-slavery labor. And if the latter is true, it is not defensible to argue in favor of maintaining the status quo.

Also concerning my second question; if Jim chooses a lifestyle where he needs to live in a 3 bedroom house in an expensive city, and Joe has a lifestyle where he lives in a 1 bedroom apt in a less expensive part of town, does Jim get more UBI than Joe due to his chosen lifestyle?

No.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Can you summarize it or something for your audience? It's behind a paywall.

Sorry I cant afford it myself. Just provided it for reference from an academic site for those willing enough to sign up.

 

[Kfox]

Either the additional wage cost won't be significant enough to make a major difference on overall inflation or we have some very serious underlying problem where the economy relies on quasi-slavery labor.

So how are you defining "quasi-slavery labor"? Is it any job that is difficult?

And if the latter is true, it is not defensible to argue in favor of maintaining the status quo.

The latter is true. So how do you fix this?

No.

So everybody gets the same UBI pay regardless of chosen lifestyle? If so, ether some people will be over paid, or UBI will not cover basic expenses for a lot of people due to lifestyle choices.