5 ms·

I've also seen within the same organization how such people are treated. For example janitorial workers. At an old workplace of mine there were three shifts of

I've also seen within the same organization how such people are treated. For example janitorial workers. At an old workplace of mine there were three shifts of at least two workers three during the day. Then they were cut to just one worker per day and evening no nights. One person frantically running from bathroom to bathroom not even getting to the other tasks that had to do like vacuuming. Then they cut their hours to part-time for all but two workers. At minimum wage it was barely livable on 40 hours per week. They also ask the night worker to come in the next day with less than a seven hour gap from the previous shift. Even at the punch clock they were scolded for punching in or out a mere 1 minute off from the time to work or end. I could tell when talking to the staff many of them felt defeated and this was the only job they could do. They just had to sit there and take it. Guaranteed income (GI) would at least buffer some of the anxiety. I could also see businesses knowing it existed would cut worker hours to part-time. But if part-time plus GI was enough then the worker has the power.

godelski 5y ago
> Guaranteed income (GI) would at least buffer some of the anxiety. I could also see businesses knowing it existed would cut worker hours to part-time. But if part-time plus GI was enough then the worker has the power. This is the biggest advantage I see, and shows why you wouldn't even need a living wage. You need a sufficient amount of money so that if a worker is being abused they can say "fuck it, I quit" and be able to live until they find another job. Being able to do that should prevent a fair amount of abuse in the first place.
- manicdee 5y ago
  How can they afford to quit if they aren’t earning enough to live on in the first place? You have that luxury because of savings.
  - godelski 5y ago
    Even a small amount of income gives breathing room. That's the idea here. A full UBI would mean there's no chance of suffocating. I'm saying that we can dip our toes in first and we should still see effects. It isn't an all or nothing scenario as many put forward.
    - HowTheStoryEnds 5y ago
      Only if all costs and prices remain the same as before the ubi and that seems a ridiculous pipe dream.
- bwb 5y ago
  I don't get it... why not raise minimum wages to reflect local cost of living? IE, why tax all of us instead of the businesses not paying enough for their employees?
  - jakelazaroff 5y ago
    In that scenario, you’d still need to work. Basic income increases workers’ bargaining power because they can quit without losing their entire income.
    - kukx 5y ago
      And their income will grow on trees. It will fail unless the government gets easy money from eg producing oil like Emirates. Otherwise someone needs to produce stuff. We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working. Let's not make things even worse, please.
      - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        > We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working. Do we have any sort of evidence for that claim?
        kukx 5y ago
        Of course. Printing money inflates its supply. And increasing the demand for products (by providing easy money) without increasing the supply of products (and actually decreasing it by restricting work) will lead to higher prices. It is economics 101 and it was tested by many countries eg Germany before the WW or more recently Venezuela.
        SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        Sorry, yes, printing money leads to inflation. I was asking for evidence that "We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working." is the source of a large portion of inflation instead of the multitude of other reasons that money is printed. Of the recent $4 trillion coronavirus payout, only about a fifth of that went to workers or their families[1], and even that isn't all to people who aren't working. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/business/coronavirus-bailout-spending/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/business/corona...
lenkite 5y ago
Damn. In our office (well before Covid), we were explicitly given training on how to behave with janitorial workers - to be polite and clear the workspace if we are working late hours and not make a mess of things for them and increase their workload. Well, this was an EU company not an American one, so far more respect for blue-collar workers.
raxxorrax 5y ago
It isn't just organisations that put pressure on people, it is mostly customers. One example is delivery workers. Everyone expects their packages to be tracked which resulted in total surveillance of delivery workers with extremely tight time slots. Competitors that didn't expand here were soon left behind because the profit margin of that industry is extremely low. Janitors are similar. People will take the cheapest option and the companies that exploit the best with prevail. This is a selfishness that cannot be denied and in my opinion would make a basic income impossible. Prices would just soar to a level where this income is of little consequence. Sensible laws for worker protection to restrict selfishness can better the situation more efficiently.

godelski 5y ago

> Guaranteed income (GI) would at least buffer some of the anxiety. I could also see businesses knowing it existed would cut worker hours to part-time. But if part-time plus GI was enough then the worker has the power. This is the biggest advantage I see, and shows why you wouldn't even need a living wage. You need a sufficient amount of money so that if a worker is being abused they can say "fuck it, I quit" and be able to live until they find another job. Being able to do that should prevent a fair amount of abuse in the first place.

manicdee 5y ago
How can they afford to quit if they aren’t earning enough to live on in the first place? You have that luxury because of savings.
- godelski 5y ago
  Even a small amount of income gives breathing room. That's the idea here. A full UBI would mean there's no chance of suffocating. I'm saying that we can dip our toes in first and we should still see effects. It isn't an all or nothing scenario as many put forward.
  - HowTheStoryEnds 5y ago
    Only if all costs and prices remain the same as before the ubi and that seems a ridiculous pipe dream.
bwb 5y ago
I don't get it... why not raise minimum wages to reflect local cost of living? IE, why tax all of us instead of the businesses not paying enough for their employees?
- jakelazaroff 5y ago
  In that scenario, you’d still need to work. Basic income increases workers’ bargaining power because they can quit without losing their entire income.
  - kukx 5y ago
    And their income will grow on trees. It will fail unless the government gets easy money from eg producing oil like Emirates. Otherwise someone needs to produce stuff. We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working. Let's not make things even worse, please.
    - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
      > We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working. Do we have any sort of evidence for that claim?
      - kukx 5y ago
        Of course. Printing money inflates its supply. And increasing the demand for products (by providing easy money) without increasing the supply of products (and actually decreasing it by restricting work) will lead to higher prices. It is economics 101 and it was tested by many countries eg Germany before the WW or more recently Venezuela.
        SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        Sorry, yes, printing money leads to inflation. I was asking for evidence that "We already have a big inflation problem that is directly related to policies that rain money on those not working." is the source of a large portion of inflation instead of the multitude of other reasons that money is printed. Of the recent $4 trillion coronavirus payout, only about a fifth of that went to workers or their families[1], and even that isn't all to people who aren't working. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/business/coronavirus-bailout-spending/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/business/corona...

lenkite 5y ago

Damn. In our office (well before Covid), we were explicitly given training on how to behave with janitorial workers - to be polite and clear the workspace if we are working late hours and not make a mess of things for them and increase their workload. Well, this was an EU company not an American one, so far more respect for blue-collar workers.

raxxorrax 5y ago

It isn't just organisations that put pressure on people, it is mostly customers. One example is delivery workers. Everyone expects their packages to be tracked which resulted in total surveillance of delivery workers with extremely tight time slots. Competitors that didn't expand here were soon left behind because the profit margin of that industry is extremely low. Janitors are similar. People will take the cheapest option and the companies that exploit the best with prevail. This is a selfishness that cannot be denied and in my opinion would make a basic income impossible. Prices would just soar to a level where this income is of little consequence. Sensible laws for worker protection to restrict selfishness can better the situation more efficiently.