4 ms·

You are correct in that UBI alone won't magically solve the problem. I've thought that the primary goal for UBI is an attempt to solve wealth distribution ineq

by mjevans 10y ago

You are correct in that UBI alone won't magically solve the problem. I've thought that the primary goal for UBI is an attempt to solve wealth distribution inequality. Other things that also help with that issue are providing basic subsistence at a rate that the market is free to undercut; ideally also affordable with UBI. That would allow for competition, but provides a price cap for the market as well. If you say X cannot go above Y, or else the government will find a way to address this social need that society is not, then you can encourage competition while limiting predatory impacts.

Mz 10y ago
I think the UBI is a really short ride to hell for society. Time and energy put into discussing or developing the idea take away from a more vital, less popular and harder to solve problem: The lack of decent affordable housing, which is a huge and growing crisis in the US and has been for literally decades. I have written multiple pieces as to why I think UBI is a terrible idea. Here are two that I think are particularly pertinent to your remarks: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/09/it-was-obsolete-before-we-opened.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/09/it-was-obsol... http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/07/minimum-decent-housing-not-minimum-wage.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/07/minimum-dece...
mrec 10y ago
> I've thought that the primary goal for UBI is an attempt to solve wealth distribution inequality. I disagree; I think the primary goal for UBI is to remove perverse incentives. For example, removing welfare traps (where you end up worse off if you start working), or expanding the reach of price discovery (social tenants have no incentive to move somewhere cheaper if the govt covers your rent either way, and landlords have no incentive to charge less than the HB ceiling because tenants on HB don't care). I think it's well worth doing even if it doesn't reduce inequality (though obviously it'd be nice if it did that too).

by mjevans 10y ago

Mz 10y ago

I think the UBI is a really short ride to hell for society. Time and energy put into discussing or developing the idea take away from a more vital, less popular and harder to solve problem: The lack of decent affordable housing, which is a huge and growing crisis in the US and has been for literally decades. I have written multiple pieces as to why I think UBI is a terrible idea. Here are two that I think are particularly pertinent to your remarks: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/09/it-was-obsolete-before-we-opened.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/09/it-was-obsol... http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/07/minimum-decent-housing-not-minimum-wage.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/07/minimum-dece...

mrec 10y ago

> I've thought that the primary goal for UBI is an attempt to solve wealth distribution inequality. I disagree; I think the primary goal for UBI is to remove perverse incentives. For example, removing welfare traps (where you end up worse off if you start working), or expanding the reach of price discovery (social tenants have no incentive to move somewhere cheaper if the govt covers your rent either way, and landlords have no incentive to charge less than the HB ceiling because tenants on HB don't care). I think it's well worth doing even if it doesn't reduce inequality (though obviously it'd be nice if it did that too).