While I support a UBI, it would also require planning. A UBI without pegging it to the cost of living, without price controls, and without significant changes to our policy around labor would be mind-boggingly bad.
“If you give people a 1000 dollars landlords will just charge 1000 more” is bullshit for a few reasons, but with that large a change to the entire economy it would dramatically change the way our society functions. We need to ensure that we do not accidently step into a position in which we replace poverty wages and automation of work with poverty UBI and automation of work. If the work is being automated, we, the workers, those upon whose back this entire civilization has been built, deserve to see the fruits of that labor. We need drastic change to the way this works, and a UBI is a not-insignificant part of that, but it is only part of it.
A UBI without pegging it to the cost of living, without price controls, and without significant changes to our policy around labor would be mind-boggingly bad.
Andrew Yang’s branding of UBI as freedom dividend was useful in addressing those issues, because it’s no longer about basic, and more about a shared dividend in prosperity, with tax revenue going up with inflation and so dividends going up along side it. UBI is a change in labour policy without planing: The freedom to say no to work, means better quality job offers. The less anyone else wants to work, the easier it is for anyone who wants to to be rich.
We need drastic change to the way this works, and a UBI is a not-insignificant part of that, but it is only part of it.
It’s actually all of it. If your labour is not needed, and profits happen anyway, then we all get a share of that. There is always entrepreneurship, education, retraining to pursue useful contributions to society.
It’s false that it requires planning. It only requires UBI.
While I support a UBI, it would also require planning. A UBI without pegging it to the cost of living, without price controls, and without significant changes to our policy around labor would be mind-boggingly bad.
“If you give people a 1000 dollars landlords will just charge 1000 more” is bullshit for a few reasons, but with that large a change to the entire economy it would dramatically change the way our society functions. We need to ensure that we do not accidently step into a position in which we replace poverty wages and automation of work with poverty UBI and automation of work. If the work is being automated, we, the workers, those upon whose back this entire civilization has been built, deserve to see the fruits of that labor. We need drastic change to the way this works, and a UBI is a not-insignificant part of that, but it is only part of it.
Andrew Yang’s branding of UBI as freedom dividend was useful in addressing those issues, because it’s no longer about basic, and more about a shared dividend in prosperity, with tax revenue going up with inflation and so dividends going up along side it. UBI is a change in labour policy without planing: The freedom to say no to work, means better quality job offers. The less anyone else wants to work, the easier it is for anyone who wants to to be rich.
It’s actually all of it. If your labour is not needed, and profits happen anyway, then we all get a share of that. There is always entrepreneurship, education, retraining to pursue useful contributions to society.