Why Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Isn’t Working

[Endus]

I agree, $8k is a big increase. However when people think $20k UBI, they expect their take home to go up $20k not just $8k.

Those people don't understand what's going on, and want to blame someone else for their ignorance. Not an argument.

You are effectively raising tax rates just to give some of it back in UBI?

No, you're raising tax rates to give everyone the UBI. For some people, it will turn out to be unnecessary or they'll end up paying in a big chunk of the stipend in additional taxes, but that only happens if they're already fairly well off. The idea is that everyone gets the baseline, and the upper middle class and above pay the bulk of the additional tax burden.

[flam]

Instead of taking $200 from me on a weekly basis, how about you just let me keep it to start with!

[Theinquisition]

Instead of taking $200 from me on a weekly basis, how about you just let me keep it to start with!

Awww come on folks need their weed, booze, and tattoos you selfish monster.

[petej0]

You are mistaking price controls on luxury goods with price controls on necessities with a relatively static demand regardless of price.

Putting price controls on something like an Iphone or a luxury car brand or something could lead what you are saying where the demand is a direct function of the price and the reduced price creates more demand for the good and risking shortages.

Having a roof over your head though is a different beast. That is one where the demand is there regardless of the price and fairly static due to the fact that you need it to survive unless you homeless or a drifter. It is also a market, like healthcare, where they can honestly charge as much or little as they want and people will still try for at least something because they need shelter, especially if they have a family. It is a market where the whole supply/demand aspect breaks down to an extent because the people don't have the option of walking away and doing without entirely.

In the US I can think of two instances where price controls of necessities have caused scarcity.

The "Gas Crisis" of the 70's

Rent Controlled housing

Those people don't understand what's going on, and want to blame someone else for their ignorance. Not an argument.

I didnt say it was an argument, I am just saying results will not meet expectations.

No, you're raising tax rates to give everyone the UBI. For some people, it will turn out to be unnecessary or they'll end up paying in a big chunk of the stipend in additional taxes, but that only happens if they're already fairly well off. The idea is that everyone gets the baseline, and the upper middle class and above pay the bulk of the additional tax burden.

Yeah, I understand. Just seems like a waste of resources passing resources to people who will end up paying the majority of it back in taxes.

[Elegiac]

Comparing roads to ubi is pretty ridiculous.

A better comparison would be public education.

Price controls on any good, necessity or not leads to massive shortages.

Look at Venezuela, or communist Poland, russis..etc etc. For evidence.

It's almost like people want to repeat the mistakes of 1940-1990

Whereas price controls on pharmaceuticals in other countries don't seem to make much of a difference...go figure.

It's almost as if price controls on consumer goods and price controls on public goods accomplish different ends and have different mechanics.

[Fugus]

Comparing roads to ubi is pretty ridiculous.

- - - Updated - - -



Price controls on any good, necessity or not leads to massive shortages.

Look at Venezuela, or communist Poland, russis..etc etc. For evidence.

It's almost like people want to repeat the mistakes of 1940-1990

You are mistaking those nations problems if you are thinking that. Especially if they are reliant on oil or have huge corruption issues.

You are painting too broadly with your views on price controls. Not all things have demand based on price or supply. Having a price control on a luxury good with a limited stock, then you have issues like you describe. When you are doing on something with a largely static demand, especially a static demand where the current supply already outstrips that demand, that price control doesn't cause shortages it actually allows people what they need when it is a required thing.

I understand your view on it, but it is a view that is painted too broadly across areas where it doesn't apply.

- - - Updated - - -

In the US I can think of two instances where price controls of necessities have caused scarcity.

The "Gas Crisis" of the 70's

Rent Controlled housing

I can definitely see that as a problem if they did it in a single area. Then everyone floods that area because it is cheaper than the surrounding areas. Never said something like that.

I said that they would have to setup something nationally to keep the prices in check. Never said it would be easy, said it would be required to be done and done right.
Otherwise you could give everyone a $1,200 UBI and within short order most homes would cost $800-1,200 more. You see that already in areas with military bases with the prices starting to adjust to eat a military housing allowance on both total price and monthly payments.

[petej0]

Whereas price controls on pharmaceuticals in other countries don't seem to make much of a difference...go figure.

Well, when you dont face price controls world wide for your product, you can fleece consumers in other places. Lets say...The United States for example. Where there is no incentive to keep the cost of providing care down.

It's almost as if price controls on consumer goods and price controls on public goods accomplish different ends and have different mechanics.

They do, but they are not immune.

- - - Updated - - -

I said that they would have to setup something nationally to keep the prices in check. Never said it would be easy, said it would be required to be done and done right.
Otherwise you could give everyone a $1,200 UBI and within short order most homes would cost $800-1,200 more. You see that already in areas with military bases with the prices starting to adjust to eat a military housing allowance on both total price and monthly payments.

Nothing wrong with that as long as the local economy can afford it.

[Fugus]

Nothing wrong with that as long as the local economy can afford it.

The thing is, if it eats the UBI, then the economy can't afford it because it puts the people in the same bind where they go homeless without a job entirely and the whole UBI loses the safety net it is supposed to provide.

AFK.

[Elegiac]

Well, when you dont face price controls world wide for your product, you can fleece consumers in other places. Lets say...The United States for example. Where there is no incentive to keep the cost of providing care down.

Ah yes, the unproven myth that all other countries enjoy cheaper medication because the US subsidises it.

[petej0]

Ah yes, the unproven myth that all other countries enjoy cheaper medication because the US subsidises it.

If you have a product that you sell in 20 markets. 19 of those markets have price controls wouldnt you make up the difference in the other market? Especially when that other market has no incentive to keep the price of any health care procedure down? Especially if they are as greedy as American Pharmaceutical Corps are?

[Elegiac]

If you have a product that you sell in 20 markets. 19 of those markets have price controls wouldnt you make up the difference in the other market? Especially when that other market has no incentive to keep the price of any health care procedure down? Especially if they are as greedy as American Pharmaceutical Corps are?

You're assuming that the vast majority of pharmaceutical income actually goes to R&D and production. Hint: It doesn't.

The lower drug prices in, say, Canada and Australia are more due to the fact that pharmaceutical companies negotiate through a single entity with significant legal force. Which makes them far more reticent to try and gouge as they do with American medical providers.

[petej0]

You're assuming that the vast majority of pharmaceutical income actually goes to R&D and production. Hint: It doesn't.

The lower drug prices in, say, Canada and Australia are more due to the fact that pharmaceutical companies negotiate through a single entity with significant legal force. Which makes them far more reticent to try and gouge as they do with American medical providers.

Thats not what I asked.

[Endus]

If you have a product that you sell in 20 markets. 19 of those markets have price controls wouldnt you make up the difference in the other market? Especially when that other market has no incentive to keep the price of any health care procedure down? Especially if they are as greedy as American Pharmaceutical Corps are?

You don't sell a product at a loss in 19 markets and then mark it WAY up in the 20th to make up the difference. You just straight-up wouldn't sell in those 19 markets, in that situation.

[petej0]

You don't sell a product at a loss in 19 markets and then mark it WAY up in the 20th to make up the difference. You just straight-up wouldn't sell in those 19 markets, in that situation.

It doesnt necessarily need to be at a loss, If you had a certain margin you wanted to hit.

[Endus]

It doesnt necessarily need to be at a loss, If you had a certain margin you wanted to hit.

If you're selling at a profit in those 19 markets, then you don't have any need to mark it up in the 20th; you're already making profit, and have nothing to offset.

Sure, you CAN jump the price up just to make more money at patient's expense, but that's not something you should be applauding as a great success for that healthcare system.

[Tennis]

It's funny how these forums work and how useless the moderation here really is; some random person gets to make a thread with a completely false statement in the topic, which is based on a complete bullshit blog post by some two random assholes who know nothing about nothing, but no moderator steps in to correct the situation, and people keep looking at the thread title and thinking that's actually the truth.

This thread should be called "Two Random Assholes Make a Baseless Claim In a Random Blog Post:" and then what it says now. Because that's what it actually is.

I mean, I could go on some blog site, write up a blog post saying Trump is actually a Martian, then make a thread saying "Donald Trump is a Martian" and quote my own bullshit blog, and whee, sourced and credible.

Some blog site? This is the New York Times. Which newspaper has more pulitzer prizes? Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean you get to dismiss this.

[Tehshocka]

Unfortunately, Endus flat 30% breaks down around the 73-75k mark. It would have to be some progressive tax structure that still fucks over the main arm of individuals who actually pay taxes.

Again UBI is nothing but a massive entitlement plan that the middle class has to pay for to prop up the poor.

[Deleted]

Some blog site? This is the New York Times. Which newspaper has more pulitzer prizes?

Yeah, that may have been back when newspaper journalism still existed. It doesn't, anymore. Now it's just random nobodies making blog posts on glorified blog sites. Also, you might want to educate yourself on what an op-ed is. Anyone, and I do mean anyone, can write up an op-ed. That requires no credentials whatsoever.

Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean you get to dismiss this.

No, see the thing is...I know how the system in Finland works. You, apparently, since you're taking a bullshit blog post like the one you're making a thread about seriously, do not. It's not surprising, though, since you're Canadian, not Finnish. There's no reason why you'd know the first thing about anything going on in Finland. Which is why it's pretty weird why you'd even have the temerity to post something having to do with Finland, when it's just a pit you'll fall into headfirst.

In any case, do read through this thread, and read all my responses here. They'll serve as proper education for you so that you'll know why these two dipshits in this so-called "think tank" are talking out of their asses. And, next time, perhaps don't post "news" stories concerning things you know nothing about. You know. That way you'll not spread misinformation and disinformation the way you've done with this thread. All right?

[Najnaj]

Yeah, that may have been back when newspaper journalism still existed. It doesn't, anymore. Now it's just random nobodies making blog posts on glorified blog sites. Also, you might want to educate yourself on what an op-ed is. Anyone, and I do mean anyone, can write up an op-ed. That requires no credentials whatsoever.

No, see the thing is...I know how the system in Finland works. You, apparently, since you're taking a bullshit blog post like the one you're making a thread about seriously, do not. It's not surprising, though, since you're Canadian, not Finnish. There's no reason why you'd know the first thing about anything going on in Finland. Which is why it's pretty weird why you'd even have the temerity to post something having to do with Finland, when it's just a pit you'll fall into headfirst.

In any case, do read through this thread, and read all my responses here. They'll serve as proper education for you so that you'll know why these two dipshits in this so-called "think tank" are talking out of their asses. And, next time, perhaps don't post "news" stories concerning things you know nothing about. You know. That way you'll not spread misinformation and disinformation the way you've done with this thread. All right?

Stupidity and arrogance, always a winning combination!

[Findlyn]

Unfortunately, Endus flat 30% breaks down around the 73-75k mark. It would have to be some progressive tax structure that still fucks over the main arm of individuals who actually pay taxes.

Again UBI is nothing but a massive entitlement plan that the middle class has to pay for to prop up the poor.

which is needed, so that the middle class has money coming into the economy to keep them at the middle class. Also, UBI will be needed as be stated ad nauseam once automation starts taking over large portions of the employment market.

Watch what happens if you tell people you don't care, they can go be homeless and starve instead of you being taxed. See how long your house is safe and how long until robberies/muggings/etc become very common place.

Finally, those people that "actually pay taxes", only have the income and means to do so, because of how society is set up that allows it. People like to think that they somehow got no benefit, and earned everything themselves 100%. No, in the US you more than likely grew up in publically funded schools, rode on publically funded roads, protected by our law enforcement and military that is publically funded, the list goes on.