3 ms·

>One thing I've never seen explained in a way that makes sense to me is how UBI wouldn't immediately result in inflation that eats through most of the grant for

by mlyle 5y ago

>One thing I've never seen explained in a way that makes sense to me is how UBI wouldn't immediately result in inflation that eats through most of the grant for lower income households Inflation would certainly eat through some. But a decent system would be close to budget-neutral: eliminating some social programs in favor of consolidated UBI, and requiring a bit more tax receipts on the top end. > already have housing demand outstrip the supply by a significant margin so injecting money into the system on the demand side would result in rents It might do the opposite to some extent on the low end: right now people requiring assistance get money for housing with a lot of strings attached on how it can be spent. If they just get more money, they might choose to rent only a room or stay with a relative: some benefit money that's now spent on housing probably wouldn't be.

Zanfa 5y ago
But the majority of people don’t get any financial assistance for their rent, so I don’t think simplifying social programs would affect their spending behavior.
- mlyle 5y ago
  If your concern is what it will do for housing prices for the most poor-- those are the people receiving section 8 (about 8% of the population). If you're talking about the next slug up in income: they'd have some more money. Assuming 100% of this money is captured by necessities is pessimistic, IMO. And since we'd be getting rid of e.g. EITC, as you get to higher incomes UBI doesn't necessarily inject a ton more cash into the household. UBI is redistributive. It inherently moves money around; purchasing power for some (the poorest) will increase and for others (the richest) will decrease. Yes, shocks to pricing will erode a small part of this effect. One other thing to note: a UBI makes living in lower cost of living areas (with more housing supply) much more attractive, and makes relocation feasible for populations that never had the money to move. $1K/mo from the feds goes much further in Wyoming than San Francisco.
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    There are only ~2 million section 8 housing vouchers available for ~330 million people. So no way 8% of the population are receiving them. (8% of 330 million is 26 million, so for 2 million vouchers, the average household size for recipients would have to be ~13.)
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - mlyle 5y ago
      I screwed up-- there's about 10.2 million people receiving housing assistance, so about 3% of pop. But your number is off in the other direction: (counts are all households) 2.2 million housing choice vouchers, but another 900k public housing and another 1.2 million households of section 8 project-based housing (and about 400k in other programs), totaling 4.8M households.

by mlyle 5y ago

Zanfa 5y ago

But the majority of people don’t get any financial assistance for their rent, so I don’t think simplifying social programs would affect their spending behavior.

mlyle 5y ago
If your concern is what it will do for housing prices for the most poor-- those are the people receiving section 8 (about 8% of the population). If you're talking about the next slug up in income: they'd have some more money. Assuming 100% of this money is captured by necessities is pessimistic, IMO. And since we'd be getting rid of e.g. EITC, as you get to higher incomes UBI doesn't necessarily inject a ton more cash into the household. UBI is redistributive. It inherently moves money around; purchasing power for some (the poorest) will increase and for others (the richest) will decrease. Yes, shocks to pricing will erode a small part of this effect. One other thing to note: a UBI makes living in lower cost of living areas (with more housing supply) much more attractive, and makes relocation feasible for populations that never had the money to move. $1K/mo from the feds goes much further in Wyoming than San Francisco.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  There are only ~2 million section 8 housing vouchers available for ~330 million people. So no way 8% of the population are receiving them. (8% of 330 million is 26 million, so for 2 million vouchers, the average household size for recipients would have to be ~13.)
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - mlyle 5y ago
    I screwed up-- there's about 10.2 million people receiving housing assistance, so about 3% of pop. But your number is off in the other direction: (counts are all households) 2.2 million housing choice vouchers, but another 900k public housing and another 1.2 million households of section 8 project-based housing (and about 400k in other programs), totaling 4.8M households.