3 ms·
Very true - and as well as freeing you from bad jobs, UBI frees you from bad marriages. According to a recent Freakonomics podcast, a trial of UBI in a Canadian
by foxylad 10y ago
Very true - and as well as freeing you from bad jobs, UBI frees you from bad marriages. According to a recent Freakonomics podcast, a trial of UBI in a Canadian town lead to a rise in divorces. It was therefore shut down with extreme prejudice by socially conservative politicians.
On the bad job front, I think a UBI could resolve an imbalance that has always perturbed me. When I was travelling, I once got a job in a laundry - I hadn't realised that laundries have dirty and clean ends, and guess where new employees start! It was disgusting, and the only positive was the space everyone gave me on the crowded bus home. Then a contract job came through compiling a report that an overseas company had promised to carry out if they got some contract. I went from a horrible job on minimum wage to a plush office job at ten times the rate, and at the time it seemed crazy that I was paid more, not less.
A UBI would seriously shake this up. Society would have to pay more to incentivise people to do the the less-glamorous jobs, which to my mind would be fairer.
- mdorazio 10y agoVery true. Note, however, that this would also increase the cost of the outputs of those jobs to consumers. In your case the cost of laundry would probably increase to the point where it wouldn't make sense for a lot of people anymore. It's a complicated web of job loss, job creation, wage increases, price increases, automation, and several other factors all bound up together.
- pm90 10y agoI agree its complex but I would rather free people up and suffer the consequences of larger costs than have a majority of the populace engage in rather meaningless activities. It should at least be given a shot, especially when we have the means - automation - to do it somewhat cheaply.