💰 Universal Basic Income | Pros and Cons | UBI
Articles,  Blog

💰 Universal Basic Income | Pros and Cons | UBI


Have you ever wondered what it would be like
to go back to the 1970s soviet country, and return to our times with then-popular maxim:
“Down you lie or up you stand, either way you’ll earn a grand”? Every citizen in our country would have full-time
employment and a fixed salary regardless of the results of their work, and regardless
of whether they would try their best or not. But perhaps we should go even further than
that. Let the government pay regardless of employment
status. From then on, you would not have to worry
about your day-to-day survival. You could spend your time on your education
and development, without sacrificing it to make money. You would not have to accept the first job
offer that came your way. You would be able to choose the best one instead. Seems encouraging, does it not? Is it a serious solution to the problems of
the modern world, or merely some socialist utopia? Perhaps we bear witness to an impending revolution
triggered by an economic proposal gaining in popularity among experts at the Silicon
Valley and politicians in the Nordic countries, that is the Universal Basic Income (UBI). Several countries have already experiment
with “free money”, while governments face changing labor and strained welfare systems. Let us look closer at the definition, advantages,
and disadvantages of the UBI. What is the Universal Basic Income? It is a simple idea: Let us give a subsistence
minimum income for all citizens, making their day-to-day strife for survival a thing of
the past. Note that the term “subsistence minimum”
is by itself very unclear, with wildly varying levels proposed by its advocates. It is even referred to as the “extreme poverty
line.” It accounts only for the needs that cannot
be postponed. Consumption below this level leads to biological
wasting and is life threatening. The UBI idea has been known and discussed
for decades, and it has even been practiced temporarily. The UBI itself is a regular, equal, and non-returnable
cash benefit that is received individually by all citizens regardless of their material
and occupational situation. It is paid with public money. Other terms synonymous with the UBI include:
state bonus, national dividend, social dividend, citizen’s dividend, citizen’s wage, and
universal benefit. The idea is that the state transfers the money
to everyone without any conditions at all. Not only the largest or the poorest families,
immigrants, students, or single mothers pocket the money. Everyone does. You only need to breathe to get your share
of the public pie. We have mentioned that it is not a new idea. It was already discussed in the 1940s in Great
Britain (it was then referred to as “social dividend”). The concept was abandoned, however, in favor
of the classical welfare state ideas of conditional transfers addressed to the poorest. Another opportunity for its implementation
resurfaced in the United States era of Nixon and Carter. There were even bills ready to be passed,
but once again they were cast-off in Congress. Only rich in natural resources and sparsely
populated Alaska managed to implement something roughly similar to the UBI. Some classical liberals were interested as
well, like Milton Friedman with his “negative income tax.” Although, he envisioned it as a way to free
the nation from the burden of social spending. There were also some recent experiments with
the UBI. During Finland’s two-year basic income trial
which ended in 2018 some Finns were getting €560 a month. Some African countries as well as Canada’s
Ontario made similar attempts. The latter case is, however, off the map,
as the UBI proposal was abandoned after change of the political guard. The UBI turned out to be too expensive. Another such program was rejected by the Swiss
people in a referendum. The Italian government will implement basic
income as high as €780 per person and up to €1,330 per family in April 2019, and
a trial run will be launched in Germany a month later to check how the UBI affects some
of its citizens. German government is currently recruiting,
expecting to select 500 volunteers for the study. Notice that conditions tried in these experiments
are different than those of the real UBI. People adapt when they are told: “We will
give you free money for a year to try it out.” Aware that there is a time-limit for the money,
they are inclined to keep some other sources of income. They respond differently when they hear: “We
will give you free money indefinitely.” It is extremely difficult to predict people’s
behavior in changed conditions when we base our knowledge solely on their declarations. From the standpoint of philosophy of science
alone, microscale experiments fail us as a tool of grasping most macroeconomic and macrosociological
effects such as, among others: increase in the share of wages in GDP, increase in the
effective demand in the economy, dynamics of private investment or economic growth,
or changes in employment rate. These changes have a significant impact on
the individual decisions of people. In order to observe and analyze such effects
we would need an experiment on the scale of a whole country and lasting longer than all
previous trials. The previous trials cannot tell us reliably
whether money paid to everyone will support laziness or creativity. The renewed interest in the UBI is motivated
by the threat of losing livelihoods by those who could be pushed out of the labor market
by globalization or automation. Automation may be seen as a boogeyman used
as a pretext for the UBI. Some fear that the development of robotics
might make human work obsolete or less needed. The UBI advocates argue that in such case
it might be necessary to update the ways in which the society distributes income. According to Michael Munger, transaction costs
in the economy of tomorrow will tend to zero, making basic income necessary. Let us consider closer this worrisome prospect
that prompts us to look for other ways of income distribution. What are the arguments for the UBI? The pros
The Basic Income Europe Fanpage on Facebook gathers more than 41 thousand enthusiasts. Among the greatest supporters of the UBI are
Silicon Valley’s technical titans like the head of Tesla Elon Musk and the head of Facebook
Mark Zuckerberg. Ray Kurzweil, futurist and engineering director
at Google, is very hopeful about the UBI as well. According to the famous British entrepreneur
Richard Branson, the UBI “is really important” and “that it will come about one day”. In 2016, he said that “inequality is probably
the biggest prohibitor that we face to creating a sustainable and equitable future for all
of us”. What are the advantages of the UBI according
to its advocates? Getting a job – more and more often a temporary,
unreliable, “junk” job – is associated with a huge opportunity cost. Besides having to pay income tax, when you
become employed you lose the social benefits you were getting earlier. As you are required to exert yourself working,
you may earn scarcely more money. In contrast to many existing social benefits,
the UBI would be much more transparent and there would be no need to give it up after
getting a job. The UBI could lead to a reduction of poverty
rate and of inequality and insecurity. Money for nothing could give some leeway to
the employees whose job is threatened by automation. It would increase their social security by
reducing their dependence on the labor market situation. The UBI is considered to be one of the simplest
tax models that can reduce bureaucracy. It could help simplify taxes as well as reduce
the red tape associated with circulation of tax documents. The UBI could remove the adverse incentive
for mere formal adherence to the administrative requirements needed to obtain specific benefit. Defrauding disability benefits with fake documents
could become a thing of the past. There would be no need for bureaucrats to
control whether any conditions were met by people receiving benefits, because basic income
would be unconditional. Thanks to the UBI, many professionally inactive
people could start their own small businesses. People would no longer have to accept the
first available job offer, and this could increase their “socioeconomic independence”
and bargaining power on the labor market. They could take time to look for a job, invest
in their education and development, set up their own business, or work less and use the
time for other purposes. The main arguments made by the UBI’s advocates
are ethical ones. For them the arguments pertaining to the economic
efficiency are not as important. Social and ecological justice and the elimination
of poverty remain their primary concerns. As they say: Giving money to everyone unconditionally
puts moral pressure on people to act responsibly. The UBI would increase everyone’s individual
human potential and social capital. As some studies show, feelings of insecurity
reduce cognitive ability. The cons
But are there any disadvantages and risks associated with the UBI? The biggest objections to the UBI are its
costs and impact on the labor market. Even conditional social benefits put a considerable
burden on the budget. Moreover, redistribution is a rather flimsy
foundation for human dignity. The UBI could weaken employees’ motivation
to work, thus reducing their productivity. If the UBI discourages people to work, then
how will society produce wealth? From the perspective of employers, the UBI’s
harms their interests in two ways: it increases wage pressure put by the employees, making
them less inclined to work at the same time. In addition, as employers usually earn higher
incomes, they would also be particularly affected by the tax progression. Another argument against the implementation
of the UBI is the lack of observed negative impact of automation on employment. When some jobs are made obsolete by automation,
other professions, often more pleasant ones, are created in their place. Similarly, far from being a job destroyer,
globalization is a job creator. Concerns about automation leading to rising
unemployment seem unfounded. In the last century, technological progress
has created more jobs than it has eliminated – and the scale of the progress was historically
unprecedented. An increase in the wealth of society increases
its demand for more luxurious services, such as those fulfilled by artisan chefs, craftsmen,
artists, interior decorators, or private teachers. Among the least vulnerable to automation are
social workers, choreographers, doctors, psychologists, computer system analysts, anthropologists,
and archaeologists. The widespread implementation of the UBI could
also lead to increased migration to countries with the highest basic income, which in turn
could further increase the tax burden on those who work and produce wealth. Because economic migration is a significant
threat to the UBI, ensuring effective protection against people coming from abroad only to
receive the basic income would become a necessity. As such protection has its own cost, the uncontrolled
access to basic income could further threaten the financial security of the country. Designed as a response to already ineffectual
social welfare systems and overregulated labor markets, the UBI itself only furthers government
intervention in the market (and requires more taxation). Besides, one of its more serious drawbacks
is that once implemented it becomes very difficult to withdraw from. The result could be a stagnation that lingers
on until the complete shutdown of the economy. Summary
Let us summarize our knowledge about the UBI. In this socio-political model of public finances,
the government unconditionally pays every citizen an equal and lawfully defined amount
of money regardless of their financial situation. The arguments of the supporters and opponents
of the UBI focus on improving the quality of life. However, both sides have different ideas on
how this goal can be achieved. For the UBI to make sense at all, two fundamental
assumptions must be met simultaneously. 1) The UBI must be high enough to ensure economic
existence for all. If it is too low, it will become just another
way of pumping demand on the market. 2) In order for basic income to actually influence
the economic emancipation of citizens, it also must be unconditional. In other words, people simply have to be entitled
to it. The fulfillment of both of these conditions,
however, will not make the defects and threats we have mentioned disappear, nor make certain
that the BDP is the solution that is needed or most appropriate. The author of the script is Justyna Ziobrowska
from the University of Wrocław

100 Comments

  • Steven Burrell

    How do you control inflation and scarcity???
    If you just give out free money without an increase productivity, major technological breakthrough, or increased supply you just find inflation pressures on resources. Society must produce more then it consumes when a society consumes faster then it produces it begins to breakdown. The way out of todays problems is education, education, education. Automation over the next 10-15 years are going to displace low paying jobs and replace them with higher paying jobs. We need more stem/science majors, apprenticeship programs, and community colleges. We are building a skill based economy. A 2016 study by the white house determined that if you don't have a high school diploma the chances of your job being automated was 49%. Thoses with high school diploma drop to 29%. Beyond high school ie going to vocational school, community college, apprenticeship programs, job that require getting certified by test or certification programs fall below 20%.
    So the answer is not free money the answer ensuring Americans high school graduation rates are as close to 100% as possible, insuring that they develop a skill from hvac to chemical engineering, and finally take steps to ensure our k-12 system is the best in the world.
    The two best countires to model are S. korea and Germany
    First S. Korea
    1. They have one of the highest literacy rates in the world.
    2. They have one of the highest high school graduation rates in the world.
    3. 75% of the nation's population has gone on beyond high school into community/technical schools, apreantiship programs, or earned a certification or certification to work in special field.
    Then Germany has a very effective apreantiship program that helps young people become certified in job fields helping to keep a strong simi-skilled workforce.

  • mrbam88

    It all about the impact of automation and technology! Even 20 years ago we couldn't have predicted iPhones, Youtube, Facebook, Cloud Computing and most importantly A.I and Machine Learning! Buckle your seatbelts the world is probably gonna go thru the biggest economic shift since the industrial revolution! We can't apply old theories to a new age problem!! Let's give UBI a try!!

  • ruizft

    Why don’t they mention that people can afford to pay for health insurance, education and/or some bills. This video kinda sucks.

  • Soraiya

    Interesting video about Universal Basic Income and very well explained. Thank you!
    I notice that this video has got a lot of thumbs down…I think it's more to do with people being against the idea of the UBI rather than it being a badly made video. I don't know where I stand on the topic, but have given it a thumbs up for being informative and well put together .

  • Hiclclen

    The bar for low skilled work is getting raised as automation increases. The supply of low skilled workers is ever clear when you look at the wage of any cashier. Wages go down because the supply of workers increases. Ubi helps everyone, but is very important for those who have a low IQ, or those who are disabled.

  • Chris W.

    This would be AWESOME!!! I'll just sit on my couch all day, every day, drink Coca Cola, eat Doritos and play video games. I mean if I don't have to work and Ocasio-Cortez and Yang just want to send me a check every month, that's cool with me. Is that okay with everyone if I do that? Sweet! You work, I won't which means I will not pay any income tax but you will and you will fund my life through YOUR income tax. THANK YOU!!!

  • Ryan Listerman

    Guys,
    All socialism has failed, this will be different because we figured out the problems
    🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

  • Drewski intergalactic

    I believe universal basic income would be great but at a much lower distribution rate . Our capitalistic system is not working for everyone like it use too and something has to change .

  • jobokidd

    It wouldn't be sipping cocktails by the pool, those cocktails are expensive. The UBI proposed by Yang is only $12k per year which is crazy low for most families. Wouldn't cover most peoples Health Insurance premium or rent/mortgage.
    #YangGang

  • Blank

    Apply ubi everyone gets 1000 a month and make it illegal to be a hobo or that you cant get ubi and be homeless. Forcing people to get off the streets.

  • sandy gibson

    ANDREW YANG CREATED UBI TO HELP THE RICH GET MORE TAX FREE MONEY,,BUT WANTS TO SCREW PEOPLE WHO GET SOCIAL SECURITY,MEDICAID OR MEDICARE,BY NOT INCLUDING THEM IN THE UBI..I AM VOTING FOR BERNIE SANDERS,,HE WILL GET US MEDICARE FOR ALL WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT THEN UBI

  • bachiano

    Anybody talking about retraining as a solution need to look at the "Pareto distribution" 
    The future economy will follow this distribution And if we do nothing to balance the inequality of this phenomena. Humans will revolt and then we will be in deep shit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution

  • glitch gamer

    As an indian i think as huge chunk of population of india is poor i would suggest give UBI to any$50 a month To everyperson who earns less than $150 a month or keep UBI gradient so that ur UBI will decrease as ur personal income increase..

  • warren smith

    Automation advances will mean the end of worklife for the vast majority…no entry to work for young people…any unlikely rollout of UBI would have to be based on vouchers not money…vouchers for food, vouchers for rent, vouchers for entertainment etc…dependence on UBI would put the breaks on banks and the like exploiting the ordinary man and so will not happen…when it all pans out it will be every man for himself and massive reduction in population worldwide…

  • Fleur Lewis

    so if it came into affect, does the cost of living skyrocket ?..because greed is always around the corner…are rentals higher, goods and services, education etc,..which for the poor would really mean no beneficial impact at all

  • Raska The Slaanesh

    Also what can happen…. People have more money, thus i can make prices higher as they'll still buy it…. If this happens, we will be back at square one. And banning such thing is outta the way, impossible. How would UBI tackle with such a problem ?

    Also, there is no reliable way of predicting how much money will be generated for UBI in US ( the Yang guy amount )

    Also, automation is not a problem. Its estimated, by latest study, that yes, 86M jobs will be lost, but 114+M will be opened. Also, in those 10+40% probabilities of automation…. Is also job enhancement, not just replacement.

  • Jakob Fredriksson

    Like many others in the comments im also wondering about pricing after an implemented UBI. If all (adults?) are given a fixed figure of money every month wouldn't the market soon are later adjust to this reality with increasing overall prices?

    Great channel btw!

  • Victor Tesla

    gotta love how the video just barely mentions the tax increase and then rushes off to the next part. Yeah, that's only the most fucking impacting prospect of it. Stupid video.

  • Peter Nguyen

    The main problem with universal basic income is that they are trying to provide a non technological solution to a technological problem.

    In other words, while technology and artificial intelligence is creating infinite abundance, we are giving citizens $12,000 a year and this is based on the limited currency that we have available.

    A much better solution would be to use technology to provide Universal basic training so that people can learn about business and finance and investing so that they can create by leveraging Technologies including artificial intelligence.

  • Peter Nguyen

    Most people who spend time debating about Universal basic income, do not spend enough time to create their own individual strategy for surviving and thriving in an economy based on artificial intelligence and automation.

    The only person whose advice sounds good to me is Elon Musk who is saying that artificial intelligence is going to surpass human beings and therefore will you risk being left behind if we don't find a way to upgrade our brains in order to think faster and more creatively.

    However, Elon Musk is proposing to insert a chip into our brain and I think that this medical procedure will be unacceptable for most people. It will not even be legalized within 5 years so in the meantime people have to develop their own strategy for dealing with an economy that is becoming automated and where jobs and professions will be eliminated by artificial intelligence and robots and self-driving cars.

  • Daniel Delatorre

    How could this be any worse than companies demotivating their work forces with shitty corporate work culture. The difference between this, and corporate fuedalism is people actually have some leverage with ubi

  • Jonathan Picket

    Studies show that any impact on the workforce is minimal. The people who primarily work less when given a UBI tend to be new parents and students. Considering the influx of workers who currently are on disability or welfare, it would seem just as likely that workforce participation would actually increase.

  • Victor Rosales

    Let's give it a try for 1 year in the U.S then record data and see if it works you cant disprove or prove a theory until you tried it.

  • Pixel Martyr

    Automation is way way over feared and over rated. If you fear automation. Just take a look at the printing industry. Printing is all about automation. They've been trying to fully automate printing forever. Any machines that automate a human process need to be maintained. They need to be calibrated. And in the end they just over complicate the process. Automation fears are not at all realistic. I've worked in printing my entire life. The one area where automation will have an impact is in information technology. Processes that humans needed to do can be automated more and more because the only risk of loss is time and energy. In manufacturing, its time, energy and material resources. Materials are expensive. Services face the biggest threat from automation. Autonomous vehicles in the trucking industry are an unrealistic fear. We will always need truckers. You cannot automate trucking. There are too many factors making it impossible. At best, autonomous vehicles will be a glorified form of cruise control at best. Sensors need to be maintained, they need to be calibrated, they need to be tested, they need to be replaced. There is just too much labor involved. Parts wear down, parts need to be replaced. Parts may be different from time to time because of changes in the manufacturing of those parts, raw materials, changes in the process of manufacture, changes of suppliers, changes changes changes that all affect the performance of those parts. On the road, the weather changes. Changes in temperature, humidity, expansion, contraction, drying out plastics and rubber, changes in air pressure etc. There are too many changes that sensors cannot detect or compensate for. If you have worked in manufacturing, and or printing for a significant period of time. You should be able to come to this realization.

  • Michael Soliz

    "Social Security Increase"…What does that mean? that Social Security recipients will get the Freedom Dividend no strings attached? That would be false since the Social Security award can be replaced on an opt-in basis. Thus, if the Social Security check is less than the $1000 dividend a recipient can opt-in for a few extra bucks more. However, most Social Security checks are more than $1000 which would keep recipients from opting-in thereby leaving them out of the "no strings attached" proposal. Whereas a wage earner can opt-in for $1000 added to his wages. this seems unfair to Social Security recipients who cannot keep their awards like the wage earner if they opt-in. I don't see how most seniors (representing millions of votes) can vote for UBI in the 2020 election.
    ….But if "social security increase" has nothing to do with gov. Social Security, then I my bad.

  • Cash App: PhoenixDingo80

    I Loved it! Gave a thumbs up! …I did a video on this as well
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3449b5ynfiA&t=308s

  • saf dipo

    Why not testing it with something cheaper,

    "Universal basic trophy", every participant got a trophy, no need a harsh competition.

    "Universal basic grade", everyone got minimum B, regardless study or attend the class, student will have more social time like going party and protesting.

  • Eric Stewart

    Social workers become less necessary as people’s basic needs are met. Additionally, I we have never had this level or pace of automation before, so it’s impossible to look at the past to predict the future. We are on the cusp of having a lot of AI experiments turn into products. Additionally, we have a lot of workers wanting to unionize, as employers look for alternatives several will choose automation and then the domino effect will begin.

  • Ling-Ling Gutierrez von Wallenstein IV

    The number that gets thrown around is $1000 per month or $12000 per year. That is not enough to just retire for the rest of your life, but enough to act as a shock absorber or for those unexpected payments while you earn money elsewhere. So if you want a good life (home and a car included), you will need to get a job to supplement the UBI payments.
    I think this is a very good idea. We in America love to be inefficient and to spend money the worst way just for ideological reasons. If we help the needy rich all the time, we should help everyone who is below that level.

  • Arnold H

    Ubi isnt anti capitalism it’s actually people oriented capitalism. It’s the corporatists philosophy that would rather control the free market through scarcity

  • shayne smith

    The only way ubi to be successful and productive is if we make the United Nations disband and the president and the rest of Congress focuses on our nation only while using our military to go to war for resources or information

  • Melissa Jasso

    Sorry but Congress wouldnt pass this idea unless there was a super majority of what people would consider extremely liberal Democrats in the house and Senate. UBI simply goes against the traditional Republican party value of, working for what you get. And many many Democrats think this is a terrible idea fundamentally and would never fight or vote for it. Basically, even if Yang or Bernie were to make it into the White House, more than likely (simply due to the American electorate) none of these sweeping changes would ever happen. Congress would simply never allow it. This is not all because the politicains are evil Bernie and Yang haters..it's just the system they've been put in. Polarization people, it's a bitch.

  • Mher Ghazaryan

    Technology developers exponentially. If you think it's not the right time to at least start talking about it, then you're blind. I don't mean to insult anyone, but that's the truth. The growth rate of technology is only going to increas and so will the economy. For non professional workers, the effect is going to be devastating. Out of top 10 most common jobs in US, nursing is the only professional job. Rest can be easily replaced by AI and robots.

  • Puddington

    Automation should be making our lives easier, not harder. The only way that can happen is if we take control of automation through a VAT and give that money directly to ourselves. We need to stop making ourselves compete against automation and just let automation work for us instead. This is a profound shift in our philosophy as a society. We need to see our well being and flourishing, not our value to the market, as the real value to society. That's the only way automation will work for us. That's the only way we can live in a post scarcity economy.

  • Valentin Li

    I come from Ontario where Doug Ford just cancelled the UBI testing in the poorer towns suddenly. The budget was there and the project just started. Don't let them lie to you about it being too expensive and unaffordable. We never even had the time to review the effects and the actual cost!

    Also that Ford Nation reduced funding for health care, education, water treatment, programs for handicaps & kids with special needs. Amongst many more cuts.

    All this and he STILL grows the provincial deficit! Cause of tax breaks to his wealthy friends! But there is a buck-a-beer to drown your sorrows as you get fucked!

    Just my rant on one of the worst provincial leader in Ontario!

  • vdv718

    isn't UBI just a taxcut for most ppl? for minwage workers it's a wage increase & for those on welfare it's just a replacement of their current cash benefits (& removal of reporting requirements).
    all 3 of those things – taxcuts, minwage increases, & welfare changes – have been tried before wo any of the worries posted as "potential cons" in this video coming to fruition. right?

  • Dlonra Reggenzrawhcs

    The only one skeptical about UBI is some one with an above average pay or some one who is rich or get rich by making other poor.

    There is no other reasone to be skeptical, none.

  • ron gants

    UBI is NOT "paid with public money". It is paid with money expropriated from producers of value.
    When the Government controls your income, they control what you say, do, and think. Human freedom will be a thing of the past.

  • ron gants

    UBI is about equality of outcomes, which has always appealed to freeloaders and losers.
    The United States was founded on a very different principle: Equality of opportunity.
    The Socialists and elites who favor UBI understand that it will appeal to losers, who will vote for it, and ensure the tyranny of Socialist politicians and corporate elites for generations.

  • Paul Standaert

    Assuming nothing else changes along with it, getting that Universal Basic Income would mean that $zero$ would instead just start at $1,000 instead.

    I don't know about you, but if I was a landlord and now I knew everyone had an extra $1,000 in their pockets, my rent prices would go up. Because… why not?

  • Paul Standaert

    If you own a business, would you expect your and everyone else's business to see an increase in demand for your goods & services? If so, as a business owner, you have two options — expand your business, or raise your prices. Expanding your business makes you work harder for what turns out to be not a lot of extra $$$$. If you raise your prices to continue to achieve that equilibrium point in the supply and demand curves, you would make more $$$$ and not have to work harder. There's a fine line to draw there. With all the business regulations that the democrats like to push, why not just raise your prices?

  • Edward Dodson

    An important public policy concern raised by providing every
    citizen-with-a-universal-basic-income distribution is the impact on the cost of
    housing. Market forces will (under current property tax regimes in most
    countries) result in a demand-pull-increase in the cost of leasing an apartment
    or purchasing a residential property. This is simply what occurs when any broad
    income in individual or household income occurs. The supply of housing cannot
    be increased very quickly to achieve a stable relationship between demand and
    supply, and, therefore, of prices.

    The problem can be solved by communities restructuring the

    taxation of real estate so that all property improvements are exempted,
    replaced by an annual charge to owners of land equal to the potential annual
    rental value of whatever land is held. This change in tax policy would remove
    from the market the potential to provide by speculating in land rather than
    engaging in development. A real financial incentive would accrue to owners of
    land to bring the land held to its highest, best use – or sell to someone who
    would.

    Absent the above change in public policy, communities need
    to commit financial resources to the subsidization of construction of new
    housing units affordable to those of low or modest incomes. Developers can be
    awarded tax credits for constructing housing units subject to restrictive
    covenants requiring any resale be limited to households within a certain income
    limit (e.g., 80 percent of area median income). Or, communities may decide to
    allocate public land for the construction of permanently affordable rental
    housing. Other options include limited equity cooperatives or housing
    constructed with land owned by a community land trust.

    Edward J. Dodson, Director

    School of Cooperative Individualism

    www.cooperative-individualism.org

  • Jim Tan

    Alaskans have been having UBI for almost 40 years, it's pros definitely outweight cons otherwise they would have gotten rid of it decades ago. Yes automation traditionally creates new jobs but with artificial intelligence it's likely that the speed of innovation is accelerating to a point where labor market is simply unable to cope with the job loss (low skilled especially) fast enough. Above all, the simple fact that UBI eradicates poverty, reduces crime rates and reduces hospital visits in society makes it a very viable policy option.

  • ASeeker

    I can't say whether I'm for it or against it, but I am curious to see what would happen if the government decides to implement the UBI.

  • Butt Plug

    The issue will be addressed when technology reaches a predetermined level, at this point the governments will genocide the population. Clearly at this point you become useless eaters, not only are you not worth $1000 a month in free money, youre not worth allowing to consume resources.

  • Gregory Eaton

    I know people look at this as government control, but look at this way the government that somewhat has to answer to the masses or corporations that answer to a few big time shareholders. See that's all money is. Your ability to survive. Also it's not even fair on the corporations to have to provide every little thing to it's employees. It actually makes more sense for the government to provide some things for basic survival than it does for corporations. That said this would allow in my eyes for people to actually attempt to go and make their ideas a reality if they can survive while developing their ideas.

  • Field Flower

    Doesn't this take the tax target off of corporations and target the consumer if it is partially paid for by VAT? Like why not tax the machines the corporations use?

  • Field Flower

    If everyone would get $1000/mo more, prices rise because it's "too much money chasing too few goods." Thoughts?

    It creates too much demand for goods and services, so prices rise to trim demamd to a more manageable amount for suppliers to meet.

    Prices rise especially for things there are limited amounts of, like apartments, used cars, vacation spots and also for highly sought after items like designer sneakers.
    Let's imagine that…Matt opts in for $1000/mo…so do 200M other US citizens…

    Matt's $800/mo rent changes to $12,00 and a car payment for a nicer used car goes up $150/mo higher than the last time he looked.

    He goes to his cell phone store to upgrade to an apple cell phone that last week cost $699, now it's $799. That's $100 more, but that's not actually how much more it will cost. The VAT will increase that cost another 10%.

    $699 + 55.92 (8% sales tax)3 = $754.92

    Now it went up to $799 + 63.92 (8%sales tax) +79.90(10% VAT) = $942.82.

    That's $188 more, not $100 more.

    Both the price hikes due to demand being higher than supply, and the VAT itself, raises costs for the consumer.

    If Matt has been saving, the money he saved has less buying power when the prices go up.

    Will Matt be better off, back to the same place, or worse off? ☺

  • Robert Donovan

    Just to keep alternatives in mind, here is a proposed solution to this problem ubi intends to fix that offers all the benefits of a UBI, but also provides income mobility, and humanely ends the welfare state, and, if followed, will, over time end poverty for good, not just guarantee a poverty income. All without costing an additional 2.6 trillion we don't have.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_3Nt_M-srQ

  • Keep Calm And Give Kris A Hug

    The only way UBI could succeed is with the elimination of capitalism. We would have to regulate and freeze what businesses or even landlords could charge. Otherwise, "Oh, everyone is getting a 1000 dollars a month extra? Add a couple zeros to the prices!" Then we are back to where we started. The other thing that would be controversial is in order to assure the economy won't collapse from lack of incentive to contribute to it, the government would have to make work mandatory for everyone to contribute to the economy. Nothing is free.

  • Kristopher Carter

    Who gets it family , parents or kids, because if it goes to every living citizen, then people will just have more kids to get the amount of yearly income they want.. lol

  • Citizens of Civilization

    Your video leans heavy on the idea that UBI will make people lazy and work less. This is an acceptable argument to make if you would but make it. Why would that be so, it is not a given. The rich do not sit around and do nothing, the poor tend to do that. Your two points in the summation don't even make sense. 1. UBI does not need to be enough to provide stability, that would just be nice. 2. UBI must be unconditional in order to be UBI, the economic emancipation of citizens would have to do with the rate of the UBI. You stated these two problems as been needed for UBI to make sense but failed to explain why that is so.

  • CreepSoldier

    In resume, the pros for the UBI are based on idealizations of a kindness beautiful world and the cons are based on observations and facts from the real world

  • CartoonMan!

    WARNING: This video claims that automation IS NOT A THREAT. This video also claims that people will not work. THIS IS A HIT PIECE!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *