4 ms·

UBI would not abolish money. It would actually create more money for everyone, and having a guaranteed minimum income would allow people to enter into employmen

UBI would not abolish money. It would actually create more money for everyone, and having a guaranteed minimum income would allow people to enter into employment relationships on a purely voluntary basis, because they would have the option to abstain from work.

sneak 8y ago
Where is the money to come from? Whether you print more and inflate it (without the consent of existing holders) or take it by force via taxation (by definition without the consent of existing holders) you undermine the basic premise of the tool that money serves as in our society.
- PebblesHD 8y ago
  Without wanting to sound contrarian, the mere fact that individuals have been able to amass hundreds of billions of dollars seems to indicate that as a tool of exchange, money has failed. These hundreds of billions aren’t helping anyone on the planet find shelter, food, or improve anyone’s quality of life. It’s being used to further the wealth of the already incredibly wealthy. Not to mention, the fact that the CEOs of these companies have hundreds of billions when their employees may only be earning thousands suggests that they are contributing hundreds of thousands of times the effort or value, which can simply not be the case. In any case, the current system has served me well as i possess knowledge that is deemed valuable at present, but i personally know dozens of people who through a variety of causes haven’t been able to extract the same, and who would benefit from a complete rethinking of the system. This again suggests that for the maximum benefit to the most people, something needs to change.
htk 8y ago
"Create more money"? If you mean printing more money, than we just get inflation, otherwise giving money doesn't create any new value by itself, it's just money changing hands.
- superstructBase 8y ago
  Yes, UBI would likely contribute to some inflation -- a little bit of inflation is good, necessary, and unavoidable. It would also act as a massive stimulus to the economy, while also empowering economically-disenfranchised people to enter into the market, from which they are barred from participating in without money. One way to fund a UBI would be through a value-added tax, which would be collected at every stage of production where money is exchanged.
  - sneak 8y ago
    Inflation is an unvoted and unregulated tax; being a flat tax it is regressive and it vastly disproportionately (negatively) affects the poor. It is not good, nor a benefit.
    - superstructBase 8y ago
      Inflation is not a tax: there is no government entity that collects inflation payments. Not having any money is worse for the poor than having a basic income, even if there is inflation. The market has no direct incentive to serve those without money. The alleviation of widespread human suffering due to poverty and the massive increase in the general utility of the market to humans clearly makes UBI the moral choice. Inflation does benefit debtors: with money being cheaper, loans are easier to pay off.
      - sneak 8y ago
        > Inflation is not a tax: there is no government entity that collects inflation payments Quite the opposite; when new money enters circulation it is spent (by those doing the printing) at the pre-inflation value of the notes.

sneak 8y ago

Where is the money to come from? Whether you print more and inflate it (without the consent of existing holders) or take it by force via taxation (by definition without the consent of existing holders) you undermine the basic premise of the tool that money serves as in our society.

PebblesHD 8y ago
Without wanting to sound contrarian, the mere fact that individuals have been able to amass hundreds of billions of dollars seems to indicate that as a tool of exchange, money has failed. These hundreds of billions aren’t helping anyone on the planet find shelter, food, or improve anyone’s quality of life. It’s being used to further the wealth of the already incredibly wealthy. Not to mention, the fact that the CEOs of these companies have hundreds of billions when their employees may only be earning thousands suggests that they are contributing hundreds of thousands of times the effort or value, which can simply not be the case. In any case, the current system has served me well as i possess knowledge that is deemed valuable at present, but i personally know dozens of people who through a variety of causes haven’t been able to extract the same, and who would benefit from a complete rethinking of the system. This again suggests that for the maximum benefit to the most people, something needs to change.

htk 8y ago

"Create more money"? If you mean printing more money, than we just get inflation, otherwise giving money doesn't create any new value by itself, it's just money changing hands.

superstructBase 8y ago
Yes, UBI would likely contribute to some inflation -- a little bit of inflation is good, necessary, and unavoidable. It would also act as a massive stimulus to the economy, while also empowering economically-disenfranchised people to enter into the market, from which they are barred from participating in without money. One way to fund a UBI would be through a value-added tax, which would be collected at every stage of production where money is exchanged.
- sneak 8y ago
  Inflation is an unvoted and unregulated tax; being a flat tax it is regressive and it vastly disproportionately (negatively) affects the poor. It is not good, nor a benefit.
  - superstructBase 8y ago
    Inflation is not a tax: there is no government entity that collects inflation payments. Not having any money is worse for the poor than having a basic income, even if there is inflation. The market has no direct incentive to serve those without money. The alleviation of widespread human suffering due to poverty and the massive increase in the general utility of the market to humans clearly makes UBI the moral choice. Inflation does benefit debtors: with money being cheaper, loans are easier to pay off.
    - sneak 8y ago
      > Inflation is not a tax: there is no government entity that collects inflation payments Quite the opposite; when new money enters circulation it is spent (by those doing the printing) at the pre-inflation value of the notes.