680
submitted 5 months ago by testeronious@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 42 points 5 months ago

Oh this is an awesome comment. I love talking about this part of UBI

I studied Economics in school and dived deep into UBI. Some interesting facts/research for you:

  1. (Fun fact) The US already has UBI, just a super watered down version. It's called EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit). It's a Nixon brainchild and was thought they could use UBI to reduce the inefficiencies of such a big government. I.e. get one nice UBI check that covers healthcare, retirement, insurance, education, food, housing, etc. blah blah blah, and you can shut down a bunch of federal government agencies that are pretty inefficient.

  2. The car dealership thing happened because of a variable that we often discount: information (or knowledge). The car dealership knew exactly how much money was coming out and who got it (mostly), and they knew it was a one-off not an ongoing thing. A lot of UBI macro research guesses that we'd see some small inflationary pressure at the beginning when it's new, but then return to normal as it becomes part of every day life. And even if it does, the benefits strongly outweigh the benefits and the Fed has other tools to reign in inflation to balance the affect out.

Caveat, this knowledge is 20+ years old. I may be way off base.

[-] JustAnotherRando@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

Just a heads-up, you accidentally wrote "the benefits strongly outweigh the benefits" instead of (presumably) "the benefits strongly outweigh the drawbacks."

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 19 points 5 months ago

That's just how strong the benefits are. It's cyclic!

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

benefits all the way down

[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

trickle down benifinomics

[-] Signtist@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Sweet! I sure hope the inflation wouldn't completely invalidate the extra income, but I still have very little faith in American capitalism allowing for there to be money not immediately being funneled into the bank accounts of the 1%.

[-] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 5 months ago

IIRC, that was one of the ways Nixon sold it. If the plebes have more money, they spend it on more consumerism bullshit . . .which is money that ends up in the hands of the 1%.

Again, this is a 20 year old college course, so my memory could be way off (and aspirational b.c. I personally like UBI).

[-] DogWater@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

This second point is going to be impossible to avoid when everyone knows ubi is a thing.

In my mind I see a huge displacement coming for a large number of workers who get ousted by AI. There will still be jobs, but far fewer in each discipline. Think office workers and coders etc. Once ai matures and integrates, we are going to have millions of people without jobs as companies cut 80 to 90% in each department. UBI will be necessary and everyone who sells shit will know that it exists and we are back to square one because they increase prices. It seems hard to avoid.

To be clear, I'm all for UBI. It seems like its pretty much unavoidable as productivity per worker continues to sky rocket and wages remain the same.

this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
680 points (98.9% liked)

News

22838 readers
4088 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS