UBI is great, but First there’s gotta be separate publicly-funded social nets for essentials like food, housing, water, electricity, heating…
Giving everyone $5000/mo to buy everything you want and need is far too volatile, and with poor budgeting people will end up trapped in debt spirals, needing microfinance loans to survive.
I’d rather the government give $1000/mo to buy everything you want, then having public services to provide food, rent, and other necessities.
I fear that giving free-range UBI on its own will spawn a bunch of extreme examples that get disseminated en-masse by reactionary outlets to breed resentment of UBI and “handouts” in the eyes of the people. You’ll have folks who are physically and/or mentally ill, who spend the whole allowance on drugs or gambling or porn or other controversial expenditures; then have to turn to charity to survive until their next UBI check. I’d need to know people would have that stable base before I’d feel comfortable with them being thrown that rope.
This is coming from seeing decades of USA arguments against welfare, then watching the “For The Children” fearmongering against the open internet. I just don’t want a few extreme examples to have us all strung up.
I really like this idea on its own. Multiple public options providers for multiple different products. Water/Electricity should be government run imo; but for Food? Household items? I’d love to see a multitude of government-stamped collectives that we could support. Actually… this was exactly what President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was attempting with his National Recovery Administration.
Yes. The key thing is that when the dominant actors in the space start rent seeking, the government should be responsible to step in with a minimal cost good enough alternative.
We have collective action through violence already. We should strive for collective action without the violence.
Even the rent-seekers are better off, if we can figure it out, because they don’t have to live in fear of being Brian Thompson-ed.
UBI is great, but First there’s gotta be separate publicly-funded social nets for essentials like food, housing, water, electricity, heating…
Giving everyone $5000/mo to buy everything you want and need is far too volatile, and with poor budgeting people will end up trapped in debt spirals, needing microfinance loans to survive. I’d rather the government give $1000/mo to buy everything you want, then having public services to provide food, rent, and other necessities.
I fear that giving free-range UBI on its own will spawn a bunch of extreme examples that get disseminated en-masse by reactionary outlets to breed resentment of UBI and “handouts” in the eyes of the people. You’ll have folks who are physically and/or mentally ill, who spend the whole allowance on drugs or gambling or porn or other controversial expenditures; then have to turn to charity to survive until their next UBI check. I’d need to know people would have that stable base before I’d feel comfortable with them being thrown that rope.
This is coming from seeing decades of USA arguments against welfare, then watching the “For The Children” fearmongering against the open internet. I just don’t want a few extreme examples to have us all strung up.
This is great point.
There should be a powerful collective owned provider run as a non profit for every basic need.
Innovators can still sell an improved more expensive option all they like.
Today’s “Innovators” hate this because they aren’t innovators, they’re rent seekers.
Real innovators aren’t afraid of competition.
I really like this idea on its own. Multiple public options providers for multiple different products. Water/Electricity should be government run imo; but for Food? Household items? I’d love to see a multitude of government-stamped collectives that we could support. Actually… this was exactly what President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was attempting with his National Recovery Administration.
Yes. The key thing is that when the dominant actors in the space start rent seeking, the government should be responsible to step in with a minimal cost good enough alternative.
We have collective action through violence already. We should strive for collective action without the violence.
Even the rent-seekers are better off, if we can figure it out, because they don’t have to live in fear of being Brian Thompson-ed.