3 ms·
I won’t argue for or against UBI. But it is not necessarily true that products on the shelf have already been paid for. The company that produced the toothpast
by MarkSweep 4y ago
I won’t argue for or against UBI. But it is not necessarily true that products on the shelf have already been paid for. The company that produced the toothpaste may have borrowed money to finance the production of toothpaste. The retailer might have net-30 payment terms, which is effectively a loan from the producer to the retailer. So when you are buying the toothpaste, you are helping pay off the debt of the retailer and producer. The lenders see the profitability of the toothpaste and extend credit to make the next tube.
- a_shovel 4y agoI suspect you and the author are using different definitions of "paid for". To rephrase, in order for the tube of toothpaste to be on the store shelf, all the resources required to create it must have already been expended. The workers got their paychecks last week, the ingredients were already purchased. No further resources are required to put the tube on the shelf, and your payment cannot influence whether it gets there, because it's already there. Your payment can only influence whether there will be another tube of toothpaste to replace it later.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y agoSee, that explanation makes sense. I don't agree it leads to an argument in favor of UBI, but at least it makes sense.