10mo ago

Some people are being given thousands of dollars with no strings attached in universal basic income trials. They mostly spend the cash wisely.

www.businessinsider.com Some people are being given thousands of dollars with no strings attached in universal basic income trials. They mostly spend the cash wisely.

A common question about universal basic income, or UBI, is how people spend the money, but early trials are showing promising results.

Some people are being given thousands of dollars with no strings attached in universal basic income trials. They mostly spend the cash wisely.

Economics @lemmy.world

MicroWave @lemmy.world

10mo ago

Some people are being given thousands of dollars with no strings attached in universal basic income trials. They mostly spend the cash wisely.

www.businessinsider.com /how-people-spend-universal-basic-income-ubi-food-housing-transportation-2024-4

1 0

BasicIncome @lemmy.world

testeronious @lemmy.world

10mo ago

Some people are being given thousands of dollars with no strings attached in universal basic income trials. They mostly spend the cash wisely.

www.businessinsider.com /how-people-spend-universal-basic-income-ubi-food-housing-transportation-2024-4

1 0

You're viewing a single thread.

128 comments

Oh look UBI experiment number 1578 says the same thing.
And people will still ignore it and pretend UBI is unproven.
- Except of course none of these are UBI experiments. The U has been completely forgotten.
  They're trying to water down the idea of UBI to renaming "benefits". There's only one class of people who would find this advantageous, and it ain't us.
  The reality is that we won't know for sure how it works across an entire population until a small country changes its tax structure to make this possible across everyone. Would people quit shit jobs more often? Would minimum wage be abolished? How much work is considered saturation when all the crap is stripped away?
  Real actual UBI would be an enormous societal change (I believe for the better), and I'm not sure that giving a handful of poor people some money and watching them spend it on things they need to survive is particularly worthwhile. We know that. It's everyone else that might throw a spanner in the works.
  
  Ahhh the, "the experiment is impossible" argument. Except no one ever argues that the math is wrong once the self sustaining tax system is explained. Because it's really quite simple. So we don't need an experiment for that do we?
  We look at people's employment status and their financial literacy. And this is study number 1542 proving that it would not cause massive drop out from employment and people are capable of budgeting the extra money responsibly.
  
  And this is study number 1542 proving that it would not cause massive drop out from employment
  And where, pray tell, has it proved that?
  The only way that it would not cause a drop in employment is if UBI is not enough to live off, which defeats the whole purpose.
  
  UBI as an entire living stipend is an end state scenario; when automation is extremely advanced. Nobody serious is suggesting that for right now.
  
  I think any definition of UBI that does not contain enough to live off is not really UBI.
  And yes, to live off it, you'll be shopping in Aldi, eating very basic food, and living in an area that isn't very nice. I'm not suggesting you should be able to live on it in a nice area of SF or somewhere else with ludicrous property prices on UBI. It would probably involve some basic housing being thrown up by the government.
  We already live in a society with enough money to ensure everyone can live. It would just be nice to get rid of the cruelty in the lower rungs.
  
  We already live in a society with enough money to ensure everyone can live. It would just be nice to get rid of the cruelty in the lower rungs.
  Very well said. Unfortunately, for some, the cruelty is the point.
  
  Should the people who work in SF be able to live there?
  One way to tackle the problem of wealth distribution is a UBI. Because it effectively just acts as an extra tax on the wealthy and a stimulus for the working class. It effectively rebalances the economy over time. It also helps people get better jobs, job training, and supports creative workers. Of course not everyone can get the "good jobs" but this makes the labor market more competitive so even the "bad jobs" will need to treat workers better to keep them.
  
  I mean yeah, they'll have to. But they'll have to be paid enough to live there. If you're paying a janitor $80k because that's what he needs to vac to floors and empty the bins, companies might start asking "what the fuck are we putting our businesses in SF for?"
  Remote work is another good equaliser there, but comes with the downside of remote workers also being available overseas and a lot cheaper.
  
  This has been my primary question about UBI: if landlords know that everybody has an extra $1000 per month, what stops them from raising rent by exactly that amount?
  My biggest concern with UBI is that it would be great for a couple of years, and then the greedy fingers of capitalism would find a way to start clawing it back. I don’t see how UBI works without including a bunch of protections to keep the newly financially stable populace from being exploited again.
  
  Because we've already capped annual rent increases and stood up a special part of the DOJ to prosecute any price cartels.
  UBI doesn't answer every problem. That doesn't mean it's a bad idea.
  
  For the record, I don’t think it is a bad idea—I want it to be a good idea and I would benefit from it.
  I just don’t trust corpo America to let us normies experience an increase in our quality of life without it putting a target on our backs.
  I’m glad to hear about the rent cap. Does that apply to new developments as well? Could somebody tear down an old apartment and build new ones at double the cost?
  I’m not trying to slam UBI or interrogate you, I’m genuinely curious. I just have a natural resistance to getting my hopes up after watching nearly every other proposed social program in my lifetime turn out to be varying shades of bullshit.
  
  Oh no. We're going to have to fight. The idea that we won capitalism in the 80's and 90's seriously set us back. We're going to have to fight and keep fighting our entire lives.
  
  Because not everyone has an extra $1000 a month. The median working person's tax will increase to the point that the UBI is wiped out (and high earners will find their tax burden more than it is now). This is how it works. It's not free money on top of your existing money. It's a barrier at the low end preventing money from going below a certain level.
  
  I see, so it sort of scales where they take some or all of the UBI back in taxes based on your income? Would the tax evasion that is common with the ultra-rich thwart this design?
  And if only the poorest demographic has the extra $1000, then wouldn’t that concentrate potential price increases in low income neighborhoods?
  Thank you for answering my questions and feel free to tap out whenever, I just haven’t had the chance to ask anyone about this who seems to have done any real research on it.
  
  Well the ultra rich don't really pay a level of income tax that reflects their wealth anyway, but even if they were actively trying to fiddle things any amount of UBI would be but a rounding error in their finances. For the actual rich, nothing short of a wealth tax will do.
  As for the second question, possibly. Although UBI does replace benefits, and I'd wager most low income neighbourhood are already using those benefits to top up landlord retirement funds anyway. UBI is as much about letting people have the money without making them balance it on their nose first while praising the glorious taxpayers that fund it.
  
  Thank you, I learned some things today.
  
  the ultra rich don't really pay a level of income tax that reflects their wealth anyway
  Nor does anyone else.
  Income tax reflects income. It has zero relationship with wealth/net worth.
  EDIT: lmao even the most basic factual statements get downvoted when they're inconvenient to the narrative, huh guys?
- But people won't want to slave away for my megacorp for starvation wages if we pay them not to work!
- Experiments like these only proves "BI". Still waiting for someone to explain how the "U" is supposed to work.
  
  There are multiple ideas, all of which have merits and drawbacks because this is reality.
  Piss easy to find them yourself and not pretend like you actually know what you're on about.
  
  Sorry, I assumed you were being sincere and looking for a discussion.
  
  Simply put you give everyone X amount. We'll use 100 because it's easy. Then you tax it back on a sliding scale. At the low end they keep the entire 100 dollars. At the high end it is all paid back. In the middle you'd get 100 dollars and owe 50 back in taxes.
  This actually removes a lot of the administrative overhead and allows UBI to circulate a lot more money than you're actually paying into it.
  Less simply, I'll let this guy explain it.

128 comments