8 ms·
“more buying means more production and reduced costs due to volume. “ Not in housing, not in health care and not in education. In other sectors, yes.
by Ididntdothis 6y ago
“more buying means more production and reduced costs due to volume. “
Not in housing, not in health care and not in education. In other sectors, yes.
- JoeAltmaier 6y agoNot clear. They build new houses. Health care hires and expands. New schools open all the time. And volume decreases cost in those areas too. Now they may be over-regulated and broken; no argument there.
- Ididntdothis 6y agoAre you saying that housing, education and health care haven’t seen massive price increases over the last few decades?
- drunkonpappy 6y agoHe didn't say that at all He alluded to how those systems being over-regulated and broken prevent the usual economic factors from working. E.g. if you don't allow people to build new houses in certain places then that makes it quite easy for housing prices to go up in those areas
- Ididntdothis 6y agoThen let’s fix those first before talking about UBI.
- JoeAltmaier 6y agoOr not. Because folks are hurting now. And with UBI they might be able to move to more affordable locations anyway, which helps solve the other problem right there.
- drunkonpappy 6y agoThere's no reason we can't implement UBI asynchronously For what it's worth, of all of these solutions, UBI is the one that requires the least overhead, by far. Housing requires actually building houses. Education means making broad structural changes to many different levels of the whole system UBI, as it has been mainstreamed, is literally just playing a trick within the money/accounting/tax system to lift people out of poverty. This will have a positive spill-over effect into other stuff
- MiroF 6y ago> In other sectors, yes. Not even. But it's not worth arguing about this, it's basic macro and if s/he doesn't want to educate themselves, that's up to them.