3 ms·

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Welfare is a tax, and a much needed one since the alternative costs even more. I don't really see how a universal basic i

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Welfare is a tax, and a much needed one since the alternative costs even more. I don't really see how a universal basic income (UBI) solves much of anything that other welfare programs couldn't solve more effectively. If the argument is that it's easier to just give everyone $1,000, then I think you're a lazy policymaker.

paulddraper 7y ago
Welfare programs are horribly inefficient and full of perverse incentives. But I doubt UBI is any better overall. In the U.S. native tribes have effectively had UBI for years and years, whether from government settlements, or casino windfalls (granted, sometimes with limitations on mobility...but hopefully this system would work without just giving it to urban landlords). The economies of many native tribes are notorious troubled.
- carapace 7y ago
  > many native tribes are notorious troubled Victims of genocide have additional complicating factors, eh?
Reedx 7y ago
Giving people the money directly, for them to use where it's needed in their particular case, is far more efficient than any program could ever possibly be. It's just the math and physics of it. Programs have all sorts of overhead and need to be generalized. They introduce inefficiency by default. And the larger it is, the more inefficient it becomes. That's just how it works with any organization. Even in the private sector (startup vs corporation). With UBI, are they a citizen and 18+? Send check. Not much overhead there.
- nixpulvis 7y ago
  I'd love to know exactly how you figure it's more efficient. Sure, it's more efficient for the bureaucrats, but for the market as a whole? If you give me $1,000 a month, I can promise you I won't just be spending it on my needs every month. Even people in massive debt don't always spend towards their needs effectively.
carapace 7y ago
> There's no such thing as a free lunch. Sure there is. In fact, all lunch was free until we invented money and farming. The Sun is a free lunch. "It's raining soup, grab a bucket!"
- nixpulvis 7y ago
  The sun still requires space to harvest, much like anything.
  - carapace 7y ago
    Well if we can't agree that each person gets enough [space for enough] sunlight for free just because of birth and gravity, then what is there to talk about? Keep in mind that, if we can beat gravity just a little bit, there's a lot of space, eh? I mean, nothing but, really. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power
    - nixpulvis 7y ago
      Um, no I don't think we all agree about how much space birth entitles you to... But there are some fundamental rights. I'd rather address those directly, rather than give everyone $1,000 and hope for the best.
      - carapace 7y ago
        I'm just pointing out that, as Bucky Fuller liked to say, the Universe is set up for our success, including a huge power plant in the sky. In other words, scarcity is a choice at this point in history and we should be choosing abundance instead.

paulddraper 7y ago

Welfare programs are horribly inefficient and full of perverse incentives. But I doubt UBI is any better overall. In the U.S. native tribes have effectively had UBI for years and years, whether from government settlements, or casino windfalls (granted, sometimes with limitations on mobility...but hopefully this system would work without just giving it to urban landlords). The economies of many native tribes are notorious troubled.

carapace 7y ago
> many native tribes are notorious troubled Victims of genocide have additional complicating factors, eh?

Reedx 7y ago

Giving people the money directly, for them to use where it's needed in their particular case, is far more efficient than any program could ever possibly be. It's just the math and physics of it. Programs have all sorts of overhead and need to be generalized. They introduce inefficiency by default. And the larger it is, the more inefficient it becomes. That's just how it works with any organization. Even in the private sector (startup vs corporation). With UBI, are they a citizen and 18+? Send check. Not much overhead there.

nixpulvis 7y ago
I'd love to know exactly how you figure it's more efficient. Sure, it's more efficient for the bureaucrats, but for the market as a whole? If you give me $1,000 a month, I can promise you I won't just be spending it on my needs every month. Even people in massive debt don't always spend towards their needs effectively.

carapace 7y ago

> There's no such thing as a free lunch. Sure there is. In fact, all lunch was free until we invented money and farming. The Sun is a free lunch. "It's raining soup, grab a bucket!"

nixpulvis 7y ago
The sun still requires space to harvest, much like anything.
- carapace 7y ago
  Well if we can't agree that each person gets enough [space for enough] sunlight for free just because of birth and gravity, then what is there to talk about? Keep in mind that, if we can beat gravity just a little bit, there's a lot of space, eh? I mean, nothing but, really. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power
  - nixpulvis 7y ago
    Um, no I don't think we all agree about how much space birth entitles you to... But there are some fundamental rights. I'd rather address those directly, rather than give everyone $1,000 and hope for the best.
    - carapace 7y ago
      I'm just pointing out that, as Bucky Fuller liked to say, the Universe is set up for our success, including a huge power plant in the sky. In other words, scarcity is a choice at this point in history and we should be choosing abundance instead.