UBI what do you think it should be where you are?

[Svifnymr]

The only time you'd realistically need UBI is if there was literally no market for work, which is not right now. Only arguments I've seen depend on if/when/how AI gets developed and implemented, which could have some drastic effects on society. Even then, there's no guarantee that a UBI is even necessary. It's just taking someone else's earned money and giving it to someone else who didn't earn it.

Yeha, when we'll need it is when automation replaces most jobs, and that will also be when something like it can work. If farms are automated and food is delivered with little human labor, the "UBI" is really just a method to track resources rather than a welfare system.

You'd of course need a universal medical care, which will be cheaper with nurse practitioners following advice of AI's. Some sort of system like Gates proposed to tax the robot/ AI's job as if it were a person so the business is still paying income tax for the role rather than just a person.

The UBI would replace all welfare/ unemployment/ everything else systems (Yang says to make the UBI/ Freedom Fund "opt in" and doing so would remove these other benefits for the person). Those that worked for extra money would be more heavily taxed on the money they make, but would still end up with more in the end since they get the UBI also.

You don't need to worry about car payments, because soon you'll have a subscription to self-driving Uber cars and car ownership will be hugely taxed and largely niche.

No need to change the rate base on people living in a city that is expensive. You don't have a right to the city when you're not working anyway. Creating sprawling metropoli with cheap housing would be easy if the people didn't have to live in the big cities. If they want to live in NYC, they can supplement their UBI with a job to afford the payments.

Mostly though, there's no way to "dabble" in this in my opinion. You need to hand the keys over to Skynet and change society all at once.

[ohtlmtlm]

I don't think Yang's UBI is good, because as someone said earlier it takes away from welfare programs. not sure about the specifics, but that's a problem imo. UBI on top of what we currently (and will continue to improve upon) sure. but not at a reduction to social programs especially medicare/medicaid/social security... no way in hell to that.

Now, if we did have a UBI and it was a flat rate. people are saying that it would be problematic for people living in city/vs/ country as far as cost of living.. Wouldn't a flat UBI encourage new home buyers to take advantage of that and help crowded cities with homeless populations to move out of the cities and repopulate the rural America that is drying up and losing people every year?.. Obviously moving into the countryside isn't for everyone, you're just encouraging those who want to to actually do it and help small towns and hopefully at the same time potentially lowering housing prices in and around major cities.

[PC2]

Well, who gets UBI? What if you make a ton of money already do you still get UBI? What age does it start? Does everyone get it? Or just by household?

Universal is defined as everyone. Sure Bill Gates doesn't need a thousand dollars or universal healthcare, but he pays way more in taxes so it's not really a problem to say he can get the same benefits as everyone else. (If he even wants it, probably doesn't)

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think Yang's UBI is good, because as someone said earlier it takes away from welfare programs. not sure about the specifics, but that's a problem imo. UBI on top of what we currently (and will continue to improve upon) sure. but not at a reduction to social programs especially medicare/medicaid/social security... no way in hell to that.

Yeah people don't get that, replacement UBI isn't actually a very progressive or socialist idea. It would have to be supplementary to be socialist, which that isn't going to happen at $1k since the budget isn't even close to that size. Even with Yang's VAT proposal it wouldn't be close.

[Nasuuna]

I see a poll was added.

$2000 a month in Denver would be the only way for somebody to get an apartment and food. Rent is so insanely high.

But theres still work wanted signs everywhere, Boulder is north of us so there is tons of roomates available from the school

[Vash The Stampede]

I don't think we need a UBI yet and I'm not convinced yet that we will need it in the future. If we do, it should be pegged to cost of living in a given area.

You need convincing? I can some compelling reasons right here.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkel.../#1716718b51d8

https://youtu.be/dagjQW_jgtE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iV_hB08Uns

https://youtu.be/cLkIpKaOYXY

No, we talked about UBI during my econ classes in undergrad and it was generally agreed upon that UBI would just lead to inflation and do nothing.

That class looks like it failed. If the money comes from taxes then the money is already in circulation. Therefore there should be no inflation. Technically there shouldn't be any inflation since wages have been stagnated since 2001, but they go up regardless because greed. Where did that class think we'd get the money from?

[Xecks]

i think if it were to be implemented , it would have to be adjusted yearly.

think though that it would be like inflation though when people know people have money prices usually go up . especially when everyone has money.

[BeepBoo]

The only reason we'd need UBI is if we agree that we need every person who is born. Oversupply of any good is just that.

especially when everyone has money.

You literally can't combat that. Inflation is directly due to how much money is in circulation, and there's no way UBI would make it go down. That's the thing people don't realize about money. It's about proportions, not the number itself. Everyone starts making 5k a month? Grats! 5k is now the new 1k. Giving everyone more money doesn't give them more purchasing power unless you also control every other aspect along with it so inflation cannot occur. Good luck with that, and I hope it never happens. People aren't that special; creating them is easy.

[Vash The Stampede]

I don't think Yang's UBI is good, because as someone said earlier it takes away from welfare programs. not sure about the specifics, but that's a problem imo. UBI on top of what we currently (and will continue to improve upon) sure. but not at a reduction to social programs especially medicare/medicaid/social security... no way in hell to that.

To be fair if we had medicare for all then there won't be a need for medicaid. Also my uncle's and my father collect under $1k a month for social security, so removing social security for UBI would benefit them. I'd be in favor of a $1k UBI + Social Security as well

Now, if we did have a UBI and it was a flat rate. people are saying that it would be problematic for people living in city/vs/ country as far as cost of living.. Wouldn't a flat UBI encourage new home buyers to take advantage of that and help crowded cities with homeless populations to move out of the cities and repopulate the rural America that is drying up and losing people every year?.. Obviously moving into the countryside isn't for everyone, you're just encouraging those who want to to actually do it and help small towns and hopefully at the same time potentially lowering housing prices in and around major cities.

Upstate New York is particularly empty. Most of the people living upstate are living off Social Security and are very old and lonely. A UBI would encourage people to move there and would give big relief to major cities, plus it would stimulate the economy.

[Xecks]

The only reason we'd need UBI is if we agree that we need every person who is born. Oversupply of any good is just that.


You literally can't combat that. Inflation is directly due to how much money is in circulation, and there's no way UBI would make it go down. That's the thing people don't realize about money. It's about proportions, not the number itself. Everyone starts making 5k a month? Grats! 5k is now the new 1k. Giving everyone more money doesn't give them more purchasing power unless you also control every other aspect along with it so inflation cannot occur. Good luck with that, and I hope it never happens. People aren't that special; creating them is easy.

i think the only way something like UBI would work is for us to all have a moneyless society which would also be good for universal health care and everyone having free housing and such programs .

otherwise knowing everyone has at least X amount people will adjust prices accordingly . its just the nature of capitalism and even socialist countries . for profit societies go against a real utopia where everyone is valued as a person.

but thats a pipe dream.

people want power too much.

[gondrin]

Universal Basic Income UBI what do you think it should be where you are? Personally I think it should be based on a percentage not a fixed number meaning cost of living adjustmented (COLA), Or median income level.

I also believe there should be regional restrictions.

While an UBI is a nice idea, it cannot work over a certain size population unless tax rates go way up. Right now, in the US, there are roughly 248 million adults(the people who would receive that). At 1000 a month, you are looking at 348 billion dollars per month or 4.176 trillion per year. Even if you cut out social security and the entire discretionary part of the budget, you wouldn't even come close to covering it. Even if you removed the entire us budget and replaced it with the UBI, you would pretty much eat up nearly the entirety of the budget, not having anything else for military, medicare, infrastructure or anything else that would require spending. You would pretty much have double everyones tax rates(not just the rich) to even think about coming close to this. And this is at 1000 per month, any higher and all values have to go up along with it.

[Vash The Stampede]

The only reason we'd need UBI is if we agree that we need every person who is born. Oversupply of any good is just that.

You literally can't combat that. Inflation is directly due to how much money is in circulation, and there's no way UBI would make it go down. That's the thing people don't realize about money. It's about proportions, not the number itself. Everyone starts making 5k a month? Grats! 5k is now the new 1k. Giving everyone more money doesn't give them more purchasing power unless you also control every other aspect along with it so inflation cannot occur. Good luck with that, and I hope it never happens. People aren't that special; creating them is easy.

You don't seem to have much value in human life. Aren't you afraid you'd also be unworthy? We really don't need you.

[Detritivores]

Which is why we now have food stamps and welfare, esp if you have children. Also unemployment assistance payments if you are laid off. There are lots of jobs out there, if one is willing to make some sacrifices, which I did when I first started out on my own.

Tell me about your sacrifices in USA, OHIO

[BeepBoo]

for profit societies go against a real utopia where everyone is valued as a person.
.

The problem is the definition of "real utopia" is up for debate. Personally, I don't care about much other than having a better quality life in the world we currently live in than as many other people as possible, as, to me, that's the ultimate reflection of value to society. Why is that value important to me? Not because I care innately about it. Because I enjoy feeling superior to people.

To that end, I'm someone who would never fit your proposed "utopia" and my "utopia" would look vastly different. Thus the rub.

We really don't need you.

Funny, I'm not the one struggling to make ends meet. I have an awesome job, transferrable skill that I can do from literally anywhere, huge savings already, no struggle for cash, paid off car I bought new right after I graduated, awesome credit rating, etc. Every indicator says society values me just fine and likes me right where I am. "Need" is a strong word. There are no real "needs' as far as "society NEEDS this one individual human being in particular" to speak of. Society just has desires, and I seem to fit in just fine. Hate the fact that society values skill and people speak with their money far louder than they do with their words, and they say "we really only care about skill and making our lives better as cheaply as possible."

Society is trying to say they really don't need a lot of the people you're defending, and it's just a few hundred people standing in the way who actually think they are our leaders (lol, the government leads nothing... mark zucc leads far more than they do). Being a ref is not being the team captain, and that's what governments actually are.

[gondrin]

You don't seem to have much value in human life. Aren't you afraid you'd also be unworthy? We really don't need you.

Actually, he isn't wrong in the sense that the amount stuff costs is proportional to the amount everybody is spending. While some people making a few dollars more an hour wont make things jump up much, a sudden big increase in spending will cause things to jump up as instead of a small amount of people getting a raise(in case of minimum wage), everyone now is. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen in the long run and we will be back right were we started. Printing more money outright without any other controls in place is one of the reasons why runaway inflation happens.

[Cruor]

For me it doesn't seem moral for the state to kill anyone unless they are combatants who can't be arrested. A robber isn't a fundamentally bad person, it's always possible to change their mind on being a criminal.

A robber is fundamentally bad. If you ask any robber if what they did was wrong, all (sane) ones will say Yes. They do it because they are bad people. Good people will find another way out of a bad situation. Your point may have more to it if it were the apocalypse and it was really life or death fighting for the last scraps of food, but breaking into some ones house and stealing their stuff is NOT needed anywhere in the 1st world countries.

[Atrea]

We live in a world where automation and population causes a downward pressure on job creation.

While governments often tout job creation as one of their achievements, when they say "70000 new jobs this year", the total population increase is, generally speaking, much greater than that.

Right now, we have machines doing the work for us for a lot of things it used to take a living breathing person to do. And that's fine. It's called progress. And while it is true that jobs where people build and maintain these machines are a thing, we are fast approaching a time when machines will be able to build and maintain themselves, at which point those jobs will disappear too.

A UBI framework needs to exist by that point. Otherwise, there will be too many people, too few jobs, and there will be civil unrest and violence.

Remember; it's not just about what's in front of your nose today.

[gondrin]

We live in a world where automation and population causes a downward pressure on job creation.

While governments often tout job creation as one of their achievements, when they say "70000 new jobs this year", the total population increase is, generally speaking, much greater than that.

Right now, we have machines doing the work for us for a lot of things it used to take a living breathing person to do. And that's fine. It's called progress. And while it is true that jobs where people build and maintain these machines are a thing, we are fast approaching a time when machines will be able to build and maintain themselves, at which point those jobs will disappear too.

A UBI framework needs to exist by that point. Otherwise, there will be too many people, too few jobs, and there will be civil unrest and violence.

Remember; it's not just about what's in front of your nose today.

Honestly, we shouldn't be discussing whether or not it will be needed(it will be someday in the future), the discussion should be how to fund it as it will most definitely be the biggest expenditure in the budget by a very large margin.

[Najnaj]

Which is why we now have food stamps and welfare, esp if you have children. Also unemployment assistance payments if you are laid off. There are lots of jobs out there, if one is willing to make some sacrifices, which I did when I first started out on my own.

None of this is the reason UBI is a good idea though. It will virtually eliminate child poverty over night at a cost that is much lower than what child poverty currently costs (about 4 to 1 if I remember right, child poverty is hugely expensive for society in general). It will also be added onto your regular income and get taxed in addition to requiring a lot less administration than the current system. It is a lot less expensive than people think.

[BeepBoo]

Remember; it's not just about what's in front of your nose today.

I see no need to artificially increase the population, personally. It's obvious that humans (specifically, the number of humans) are the biggest detractor on the world from a sustainability standpoint. We need to reign in population if we really want to survive. Everyone getting 50mpg isn't gonna cut it.

To that end, we need to be encouraging fewer stronger-better-faster-smarter people. That means people who don't fall in that category are gonna suffer in the short term. Better than the entirety of the planet suffering like it will. Have to let it ebb and flow.

[announced]

I like Andrew Yang's proposal of UBI for $1000 per month and that is coming off as someone who doesn't even need it.
The reason I'm in favor of it is because it has no stipulations, if you want to earn more you certainly can. The problem with some issues of welfare and disability is if you earn too much you will end up losing them so there is an incentive to be lazy or to not do as well. This makes no sense. We should reward people with higher amounts if they do well instead of punishing them.