4 ms·

Everyone doesn't get more money, the money is just distributed differently. The rich would be paying in much more than they get back in basic income. This doe

• Domenic_S 13y ago
  Right, but cost of basics would increase. If you sell bread, and you know that everyone now has $xxK basic income, why would you not increase the price of bread?
  • dragonwriter 13y ago
    > If you sell bread, and you know that everyone now has $xxK basic income, why would you not increase the price of bread? If you are a monopoly, of course you would. That's called a monopoly rent -- and why, in a supply monopoly, the demand curve effectively sets prices. If you aren't a monopoly, you won't because competitors (either existing or new entrants) will undercut your prices until the prices are dropped to the economic cost of production.
    • Domenic_S 13y ago
      That isn't how pricing works. Your competitors would raise prices, not lower them. Either way there are only like 3 players in the "basics" market anyway so we're closer to a monopoly as it is.
      • dragonwriter 13y ago
        > That isn't how pricing works. Its how pricing works in a competitive market where even a loose approximation of rationality applies. > Your competitors would raise prices, not lower them. "Lower" relative to yours (or compared to incumbents, in the case of new entrants.) > Either way there are only like 3 players in the "basics" market anyway so we're closer to a monopoly as it is. To the extent that the absence of a competitive market in basics is a problem, its a problem independently of basic income and needs to be addressed whether or not a basic income is adopted.
  • wehadfun 13y ago
    Because somebody else would just come along and sell bread at a regular cost.