3 ms·

Migrant labourers mostly, and in places where these are not available (like Japan), strawberries cost a lot more, making them a "special occasion" treat for mid

Migrant labourers mostly, and in places where these are not available (like Japan), strawberries cost a lot more, making them a "special occasion" treat for middle classes, and putting them mostly out of reach of poorer people.

CraigJPerry 5y ago
So less strawberries but you get to bin US healthcare and replace it with Japanese style healthcare instead? That’s an easy yes.
- thegrimmest 5y ago
  Not just less strawberries, but less everything that involves domestic/UBI-competing labour, which is a lot. If we did this worldwide, it would be everything.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    Again, this is exactly what happens in high-productivity locations. Local, labor-intensive services like haircuts, waiting tables at restaurants etc. are paid more, because the workers have alternative opportunities in high-paying sectors. The flip side is that quality tends to improve as well due to efficiency-wage effects. It's hardly a disaster.
    - tekknik 5y ago
      So this makes everybody poorer. Nobody is being lifted up here. If things cost more then your money doesn’t go as far. That’s called inflation. UBI seems like a great idea on paper but you’re pointing out its problem as a feature.
      - CraigJPerry 5y ago
        >> everybody poorer The people who are currently not able to make ends meet are suddenly succeeding. So not everyone is poorer. You’re confusing “things will be vastly different” - which is not disputed. The richest today will be relatively less rich.
        tekknik 5y ago
        No, you’re either taking from the rich and killing innovation, and thereby jobs, or you make everything state owned and go full on socialism, or you cause inflation. All of these make everybody poorer.
        CraigJPerry 5y ago
        Or - you do the other thing, the UBI thing, which is none of those things you mentioned. Anarchist capitalism is probably the closest as far as i can see so far.
        tekknik 5y ago
        yup, UBI was what i was talking about there. read it again.
        thegrimmest 5y ago
        > are suddenly succeeding How are you quantifying this success? If people have "more money" but are suddenly unable to afford things they previously could (those same strawberries), wouldn't they be worse off? > The richest today will be relatively less rich. Isn't this just communism with extra steps? Why do you think these things have always worked out poorly, economically speaking, triggering runaway inflation and material scarcity? My thesis is that the the threat of abject poverty is the only thing keeping much of our economy functioning. If we remove this threat, then the economy shrinks significantly and we all end up in poverty anyways.
        CraigJPerry 5y ago
        >> How are you quantifying this success? By the lack of: >> threat of abject poverty >> Isn't this just communism Where would a planned economy come in? Surely UBI results in something more like an-cap? You collect your ubi payment in exchange for agreeing to live in the area serviced by the United States corporation. UBI wouldn’t be a small tweak around the edges of the current system. It’d be fairly radical.

CraigJPerry 5y ago

So less strawberries but you get to bin US healthcare and replace it with Japanese style healthcare instead? That’s an easy yes.

thegrimmest 5y ago
Not just less strawberries, but less everything that involves domestic/UBI-competing labour, which is a lot. If we did this worldwide, it would be everything.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  Again, this is exactly what happens in high-productivity locations. Local, labor-intensive services like haircuts, waiting tables at restaurants etc. are paid more, because the workers have alternative opportunities in high-paying sectors. The flip side is that quality tends to improve as well due to efficiency-wage effects. It's hardly a disaster.
  - tekknik 5y ago
    So this makes everybody poorer. Nobody is being lifted up here. If things cost more then your money doesn’t go as far. That’s called inflation. UBI seems like a great idea on paper but you’re pointing out its problem as a feature.
    - CraigJPerry 5y ago
      >> everybody poorer The people who are currently not able to make ends meet are suddenly succeeding. So not everyone is poorer. You’re confusing “things will be vastly different” - which is not disputed. The richest today will be relatively less rich.
      - tekknik 5y ago
        No, you’re either taking from the rich and killing innovation, and thereby jobs, or you make everything state owned and go full on socialism, or you cause inflation. All of these make everybody poorer.
        CraigJPerry 5y ago
        Or - you do the other thing, the UBI thing, which is none of those things you mentioned. Anarchist capitalism is probably the closest as far as i can see so far.
        tekknik 5y ago
        yup, UBI was what i was talking about there. read it again.
      - thegrimmest 5y ago
        > are suddenly succeeding How are you quantifying this success? If people have "more money" but are suddenly unable to afford things they previously could (those same strawberries), wouldn't they be worse off? > The richest today will be relatively less rich. Isn't this just communism with extra steps? Why do you think these things have always worked out poorly, economically speaking, triggering runaway inflation and material scarcity? My thesis is that the the threat of abject poverty is the only thing keeping much of our economy functioning. If we remove this threat, then the economy shrinks significantly and we all end up in poverty anyways.
        CraigJPerry 5y ago
        >> How are you quantifying this success? By the lack of: >> threat of abject poverty >> Isn't this just communism Where would a planned economy come in? Surely UBI results in something more like an-cap? You collect your ubi payment in exchange for agreeing to live in the area serviced by the United States corporation. UBI wouldn’t be a small tweak around the edges of the current system. It’d be fairly radical.