4 ms·

Supply and demand. If they're jobs that need to be done, wages will rise until they're sufficient to either convince labor to allocate itself to the problem or

by scarmig 13y ago

Supply and demand. If they're jobs that need to be done, wages will rise until they're sufficient to either convince labor to allocate itself to the problem or convince capital to be substituted for it.

sliverstorm 13y ago
So will costs not then also rise?
- Cushman 13y ago
  Nominal prices will rise, but what you're really seeing is the fair valuation of these services when costs aren't massively depressed by the abundance of free labor in a post-industrial society where there is less and less real work to do.
- scarmig 13y ago
  Yes, they will. Both nominal and real. That's different from the world falling apart because no one wants to clean the toilets. What will happen to price levels? It depends on the exact level of the basic income, but here's a likely scenario for my preferred level (around $10k-$12k per adult citizen). The effects are much more strongly seen for things that require low skilled labor than high skilled: those low skilled workers now have an alternative, of not working. Some extra number of them over today would take that option, but most still will work: everyone still has the same incentive--more money!--to work. The big difference would be everyone has a pile of so-called "fuck you" money, which helps eliminate any monopsony power employers at the lower end of the market have. So those costs would rise, because costs on the supply side have risen. Products and services provided by highly skilled workers would see nary a change in their cost structures: most of us get paid enough in a year to consume a decade at minimum income levels, but we choose not to do that. The pattern of consumption would also be altered, depending on how the funding tax was structured. A reasonable proposal (perhaps a flat tax on all income over the basic guaranteed one) you'd expect to result in luxuries to be demanded compared to necessities. Overall you get higher prices and higher consumption of basic necessities, and lower prices and lower consumption of luxuries. (This is all secondary, in my view, to the core of what a basic income would allow: a grand infusion of both market entrepreneurship and non-easily-monetizable value into the economy. )
  - epicureanideal 13y ago
    Well, I would say we get paid a decade worth of minimum income levels pre-tax and pre-expenses, but after taxes and high cost of living in the areas we generally live in, and after repaying loans to obtain qualifications to work these jobs, I'd say there's only one or two years of minimum income left over.

by scarmig 13y ago

sliverstorm 13y ago

So will costs not then also rise?

Cushman 13y ago
Nominal prices will rise, but what you're really seeing is the fair valuation of these services when costs aren't massively depressed by the abundance of free labor in a post-industrial society where there is less and less real work to do.
scarmig 13y ago
Yes, they will. Both nominal and real. That's different from the world falling apart because no one wants to clean the toilets. What will happen to price levels? It depends on the exact level of the basic income, but here's a likely scenario for my preferred level (around $10k-$12k per adult citizen). The effects are much more strongly seen for things that require low skilled labor than high skilled: those low skilled workers now have an alternative, of not working. Some extra number of them over today would take that option, but most still will work: everyone still has the same incentive--more money!--to work. The big difference would be everyone has a pile of so-called "fuck you" money, which helps eliminate any monopsony power employers at the lower end of the market have. So those costs would rise, because costs on the supply side have risen. Products and services provided by highly skilled workers would see nary a change in their cost structures: most of us get paid enough in a year to consume a decade at minimum income levels, but we choose not to do that. The pattern of consumption would also be altered, depending on how the funding tax was structured. A reasonable proposal (perhaps a flat tax on all income over the basic guaranteed one) you'd expect to result in luxuries to be demanded compared to necessities. Overall you get higher prices and higher consumption of basic necessities, and lower prices and lower consumption of luxuries. (This is all secondary, in my view, to the core of what a basic income would allow: a grand infusion of both market entrepreneurship and non-easily-monetizable value into the economy. )
- epicureanideal 13y ago
  Well, I would say we get paid a decade worth of minimum income levels pre-tax and pre-expenses, but after taxes and high cost of living in the areas we generally live in, and after repaying loans to obtain qualifications to work these jobs, I'd say there's only one or two years of minimum income left over.