3 ms·

"Rent will increase to cover the entire value of UBI/minimum wage increase/anything else that helps" is a stock argument. That doesn't mean it's a good argument

by beat 7y ago

"Rent will increase to cover the entire value of UBI/minimum wage increase/anything else that helps" is a stock argument. That doesn't mean it's a good argument, just a common one. On the other hand, in popular places to live (major cities), housing will continue to be a scarce resource. Adding UBI won't mean all the poor people get to move to nicer neighborhoods. But it also doesn't mean that increased rent will eat 100% of their UBI. Rather, it'll increase the amount of money they have relative to what they pay for housing, money that can go to less constrained resources like food and education.

novok 7y ago
And in those places, it's common for them to pay close to %50-%75 of their income on rent & commuting costs. And I was unclear, I should of said economic rent. The supply constrained basics of life will expand to consume new demand in the face of a UBI subsidy. Not just your rent.
- beat 7y ago
  Not every major expense is supply-constrained, though, particularly not the rigid supply constraints of real estate. So asserting that "supply constrained basics" will eat 100% of UBI is unrealistic. And even in cases where much of it will be consumed by cost of living, UBI will offer considerable flexibility, relative to current systems. Those who are homeless and/or long term unemployed will at least have some cash income that can be used to relocate or get them by. Lots of homeless people live out of their cars - and UBI will keep that car running and out of impound. That's just one example. In rural or small-town areas, cost of living isn't so much of a factor, if income is available. UBI will make things much easier for the rural poor. It will also have a tremendous impact on the middle class. It will reduce the dangers of financial emergencies and increase the savings rates for that majority who aren't in poverty but aren't rich either. Since need-based evaluation is no longer needed, administrative costs will go down considerably relative to the welfare state. And people will no longer be punished for working with a loss of benefits.

by beat 7y ago

novok 7y ago

And in those places, it's common for them to pay close to %50-%75 of their income on rent & commuting costs. And I was unclear, I should of said economic rent. The supply constrained basics of life will expand to consume new demand in the face of a UBI subsidy. Not just your rent.

beat 7y ago
Not every major expense is supply-constrained, though, particularly not the rigid supply constraints of real estate. So asserting that "supply constrained basics" will eat 100% of UBI is unrealistic. And even in cases where much of it will be consumed by cost of living, UBI will offer considerable flexibility, relative to current systems. Those who are homeless and/or long term unemployed will at least have some cash income that can be used to relocate or get them by. Lots of homeless people live out of their cars - and UBI will keep that car running and out of impound. That's just one example. In rural or small-town areas, cost of living isn't so much of a factor, if income is available. UBI will make things much easier for the rural poor. It will also have a tremendous impact on the middle class. It will reduce the dangers of financial emergencies and increase the savings rates for that majority who aren't in poverty but aren't rich either. Since need-based evaluation is no longer needed, administrative costs will go down considerably relative to the welfare state. And people will no longer be punished for working with a loss of benefits.