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
    ·
    39 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
      ·
      2 hours ago

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

  • 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.

  • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    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
      1
      ·
      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.

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    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.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    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
      4
      ·
      4 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
      ·
      7 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.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    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.

  • .Donuts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Here’s a good breakdown: https://econreview.studentorg.berkeley.edu/unboxing-universal-basic-income/

    As for my thoughts, yes there would be a noticeable impact at first, but UBI would help stabilise and strengthen the economy in the long term because purchasing power and demand will increase. If supply can keep up, prices won’t go up. Companies can’t just raise prices as that’s called price fixing. Antitrust laws should be there to prevent that, but your mileage may vary depending on your country. That means that if some companies decide to raise prices because of more purchasing power, some smart company is going to charge less to gain more market share. So we’re still doing capitalism, but there’s a social safety net.

    Also, people will still go to work to find purpose. Except “work” in this case could mean the freedom and flexibility to contribute locally, or take higher risks like entrepreneurship or becoming an artist.

  • Misspelledusernme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 hours ago

    My pie in the sky hope for UBI is that it would be large enough so that you don’t need to work to live, maybe with some frugality.

    At that point I’d be fine with scrapping minimum wage altogether. Companies would have to offer a job/salary that attracts people who aren’t desperate.

    It would be much easier to quit a job. And I think it would broadly increase the value of labor. Automation would increase, but that wouldn’t be a problem, because its no longer a problem to be unemployed.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Exactly, UBI (or direct payments from the gov, whatever works ig) to support everyone’s basic needs. Housing properly sized to each family, food, water, electric, heating/cooling, healthcare and yes even internet. Maybe even a little extra disposable so people can have recreational activities and you know, live.

      If you want luxury items, like the latest, greatest most expensive iPhone or whatever thats where you need to get a job to earn extra above the UBI

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 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.

  • Voyajer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    That’s the same logic opponents of raising the minimum wage use to justify their position

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      In all honesty it could help loosen regulations on workers rights. Flipping burgers and the boss is on some shady shit trying to schedule you a ton of hours? Fuck it. You can quit and still survive, and possibly thrive.

      Not that I’d advocate loosening those regulations. Just that UBI itself could alleviate some current issues.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      That is completely automatic. The “right”/survivability to say no is directly empowering to entire labour force.