3 ms·

>"How would it prevent inflation such that the bar for survival isn’t just adjusted to be higher?" Most proposals suggest indexing UBI to inflation, but it see

>"How would it prevent inflation such that the bar for survival isn’t just adjusted to be higher?" Most proposals suggest indexing UBI to inflation, but it seems like a period of severe inflation has the potential to rapidly turn into hyperinflation. Assuming a UBI were implemented, I have a feeling keeping up with inflation would prove to be such a challenge that proposals would be made to issue people vouchers for specific goods in lieu of continually adjusting the dollar amount based on the market price of those goods. I can easily see a government choosing to nationalize some of the factories that produce essential consumer goods like toothpaste or toilet paper as a way of controlling costs. A market would still probably exist for 'premium' non-free versions of the same goods.

nobodyandproud 4y ago
> I can easily see a government choosing to nationalize some of the factories that produce essential consumer goods like toothpaste or toilet paper as a way of controlling costs. A market would still probably exist for 'premium' non-free versions of the same goods. A voucher for basics makes sense, though that basically means a dual-currency system. We’re subsidizing agriculture so it’s really just smoke-and-mirrors. Housing and land would still remain a problem, however. I have no answers, but I want neither extremes of winner-takes-all capitalism; nor a pure socialist system.
Clent 4y ago
Very recently, parents were given $300 per child, per month. It was very close to becoming permanent. That was an UBI for households with dependent children. The argument for inflation is hard to refute given how short the program ran. The effect was that some parents could now afford to work. Perhaps, daycare rates go up to consume that $300 but unlikely as it is already a tight margin business as are many business and services. There is nothing in capitalism that says UBI must lead to inflation. All economic systems are built on rationale actors. It more like it will create artificial price ceilings. Let's say the government gives everyone a $300 voucher for daycare. Savvy business people are going to find a way to run a daycare for $300 per kid and collect that sweet government backed cash flow and lock their services to that amount. The cash flow from the first $300 is guaranteed by the federal government. Anything over $300 requires a separate billing process. At $305 that is $5 that requires an additional billing setup. There would be a gap before the return would be worth it. A scientific approach would be to weigh the cost between UBI and our current solutions. Unfortunately, politicians typically only favor the science that backs their ideology. Currently there are already subsidizes in place, some people can qualify for reduced daycare rates. This is the bureaucratic way to implement such support, there is massive overhead as there are many people in the middle ensuring that all the paperwork is perfect. What is the total cost of delivering these reduced rates vs a UBI for children? Are we doing the more frugal approach? Almost certainly not. A swath of American's stop expecting a functioning federal government and things have stagnated since.

nobodyandproud 4y ago

> I can easily see a government choosing to nationalize some of the factories that produce essential consumer goods like toothpaste or toilet paper as a way of controlling costs. A market would still probably exist for 'premium' non-free versions of the same goods. A voucher for basics makes sense, though that basically means a dual-currency system. We’re subsidizing agriculture so it’s really just smoke-and-mirrors. Housing and land would still remain a problem, however. I have no answers, but I want neither extremes of winner-takes-all capitalism; nor a pure socialist system.

Clent 4y ago

Very recently, parents were given $300 per child, per month. It was very close to becoming permanent. That was an UBI for households with dependent children. The argument for inflation is hard to refute given how short the program ran. The effect was that some parents could now afford to work. Perhaps, daycare rates go up to consume that $300 but unlikely as it is already a tight margin business as are many business and services. There is nothing in capitalism that says UBI must lead to inflation. All economic systems are built on rationale actors. It more like it will create artificial price ceilings. Let's say the government gives everyone a $300 voucher for daycare. Savvy business people are going to find a way to run a daycare for $300 per kid and collect that sweet government backed cash flow and lock their services to that amount. The cash flow from the first $300 is guaranteed by the federal government. Anything over $300 requires a separate billing process. At $305 that is $5 that requires an additional billing setup. There would be a gap before the return would be worth it. A scientific approach would be to weigh the cost between UBI and our current solutions. Unfortunately, politicians typically only favor the science that backs their ideology. Currently there are already subsidizes in place, some people can qualify for reduced daycare rates. This is the bureaucratic way to implement such support, there is massive overhead as there are many people in the middle ensuring that all the paperwork is perfect. What is the total cost of delivering these reduced rates vs a UBI for children? Are we doing the more frugal approach? Almost certainly not. A swath of American's stop expecting a functioning federal government and things have stagnated since.