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?

  • nycki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    24 minutes ago

    My stance on this is that if a machine can do the work of a hundred men, then ninety-nine men should be able to retire early with pay. Anything else is theft.

    So, yes, I support UBI, and no, I don’t think it would break capitalism. It’s the same amount of money being put into circulation, just for less work.

  • steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 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.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I think this is a good place to start as the initial recipients are those most in need.

  • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 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

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 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.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 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

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 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@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 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.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 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

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Large scale like a whole state? I only see that several states have run pilot programs.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 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.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 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@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 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@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 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.

  • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    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.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour 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.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 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.

      • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours 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.

  • missingno@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 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.

    • illi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 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

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    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.