Universal basic income (UBI) has supporters across the political spectrum. The idea is that if every citizen received a payment from the state to cover their living costs, it this will allow them the freedom to live as they choose.
But voters who turned down a UBI pilot in a recent referendum in the German city of Hamburg apparently found something to dislike. A frequent argument against UBI is that recipients will decide to work less. This in turn will make labour (and consequently labour-intensive products) more expensive.
Indeed, a recent study on a UBI experiment has found that recipients of an unconditional monthly transfer of US$1,000 (£760) were significantly less likely to work. And if they did work, they put in fewer hours than a control group who received only US$50 per month.
That’s not what I said. I said inflation will just eat up any standard of living gains you think you will make.
The problem of poverty isn’t solved by more “money” - it’s solved by moving beyond the economic/systemic model which creates poverty and inequality in the first place.
I think you have a misunderstanding here. Theres no “more money”, its tax money that already exists. Its not printing money, its simply a shift from top to bottom.
This part cant be true. How much inflation do you think UBI would cause? Like 100%? That would mean a household with an income of 4000$ and 2500$ spendings per month would not be able to afford their current lifestyle because they would need 5000$. Doesnt seem realistic.
But even in that scenario, people who lived off of 300$/month before would have 1300$ while their spendings would only increase to 600$. Thats definitely a gain.
Adjusting redistributive tax rates and UBI are two different things. You can achieve UBI through redistributive tax means, or you can do it through other means.
We can argue about how long inflation takes to eat up any gains, but the reality is it will eventually happen. Will it take 6 months? 12 months? 36 months? Doesn’t really matter. The very fact that UBI is flat based (i.e everyone gets the same, regardless of means) is the reason it has this problem.
UBI is not a solution to anything. At best, it’s temporary bump in standard of living. At worst, it’s an excuse to remove other more effective wealth redistribution methods and just contributes to worsening inequality. Don’t fall for the trap. Economic models already exist to solve these problems, and UBI is not one of them.
You literally didnt read my comment. Are you arguing that 400$ income family will spend 1400$ after inflation hits? So a 2000$ income family will need 5000$ for their current lifestyle? Thats just nonsense.
I could paste my whole comment again explaining that UBI is not supposed to raise the standard of living for everyone, its supposed to shift from rich to poor, but you wont read it anyway so I wont bother anymore.
Enjoy the holidays.
Giving everyone a “basic income” does nothing to shift wealth from rich to poor. You are thinking of just standard redistributive welfare, which is a great policy to achieve that, if implemented correctly and fairly. UBI is something very different from this, for a very different purpose. Read up on political economics to learn more about it.
If you cant see how UBI has a bigger benefit for the poor than the rich, I dont even know what we are discussing here. Certainly not UBI.