3 ms·

> Why wouldn't labor markets decrease? Isn't that the principle idea floating by UBI advocates entirely throughout this thread? They will, and I never said the

> Why wouldn't labor markets decrease? Isn't that the principle idea floating by UBI advocates entirely throughout this thread? They will, and I never said they wouldn't. The problem with your "theory" is that they are going to decrease at a 1:1 ratio with increase in labor costs from the UBI resulting in an overall "0 gain" from the UBI. > No, all money will devalue with the increase in supply and increase in labor costs. That's pretty basic economics. True, but that's not the argument you are making. You are arguing that nobody will be better off because the decrease in available labor will be entirely offset by the increased costs in goods/services based exclusively off of labor losses from the UBI. That is a nonsensical argument. There is ZERO evidence to support it. The overwhelming likelihood is that the price goods will increase, but no where near enough to offset the UBI. The remaining difference in the economy will come from wealth redistribution.

mrep 11y ago
I 100% agree with you, but unfortunately, you're talking to technology people. The amount of ignorance when it comes to economics on HN has led me to almost never even talk about it.
bane 11y ago
> The problem with your "theory" is that they are going to decrease at a 1:1 ratio with increase in labor costs from the UBI Actually, I never said 1:1 ratio with UBI. I just claimed the labor markets would decrease and monetary supply would increase. > True, but that's not the argument you are making. No, that's exactly and precisely the argument I'm making. I'm not an opponent of UBI for wishy washy wealth redistribution reasons, but because of the lousy labor markets it would create and the inflation it would create. The models for what would happen under UBI are not clear, but there are not positive economic models under a UBI scheme by major economists. UBI proponents have failed to provide any model whatsoever and fall back on vague handwaivy feelings that seem to always only show extremely positive outcomes with no possible negatives and a reliance on magic automation technology that doesn't exist.
- jhall1468 11y ago
  > Actually, I never said 1:1 ratio with UBI. I just claimed the labor markets would decrease and monetary supply would increase. But that is what you said: > In effect, nobody gets paid more because everybody gets paid more, which drives up prices, which is the definition of inflation. Emphasis is mine. That's a pretty clear indication that they will entirely offset each other.

mrep 11y ago

I 100% agree with you, but unfortunately, you're talking to technology people. The amount of ignorance when it comes to economics on HN has led me to almost never even talk about it.

bane 11y ago

> The problem with your "theory" is that they are going to decrease at a 1:1 ratio with increase in labor costs from the UBI Actually, I never said 1:1 ratio with UBI. I just claimed the labor markets would decrease and monetary supply would increase. > True, but that's not the argument you are making. No, that's exactly and precisely the argument I'm making. I'm not an opponent of UBI for wishy washy wealth redistribution reasons, but because of the lousy labor markets it would create and the inflation it would create. The models for what would happen under UBI are not clear, but there are not positive economic models under a UBI scheme by major economists. UBI proponents have failed to provide any model whatsoever and fall back on vague handwaivy feelings that seem to always only show extremely positive outcomes with no possible negatives and a reliance on magic automation technology that doesn't exist.

jhall1468 11y ago
> Actually, I never said 1:1 ratio with UBI. I just claimed the labor markets would decrease and monetary supply would increase. But that is what you said: > In effect, nobody gets paid more because everybody gets paid more, which drives up prices, which is the definition of inflation. Emphasis is mine. That's a pretty clear indication that they will entirely offset each other.