Green Party supports Universal Basic Income policy
medium.com
external-link
As Labour and the Tories return to the language of austerity, the Green Party moves towards a progressive alternative
@yogthos
link
282M

I think universal basic services would be better because that can’t be gamed by adjusting prices. Things like food, housing, healthcare, and education should be provided unconditionally.

@jazzfes
link
22M

I like universal service too. Is there a good read that discusses how it would work with food and housing? Both sectors are currently very much profit looking, so I’d be curious to learn how they would be transformed.

@ree
link
3
edit-2
2M

European social policies from the post wars were very much structured around providing services.

poVoq
link
19
edit-2
2M

Even the highly conditional basic income that some states provide is abused by large companies to push down wages and not even pay living wages.

So IMHO while there are some good ideas behind UBI, Capitalism will find a way to turn it into the opposite of what the rather naive proponents of it hope… and I find it telling that some of the large lobbyists for UBI are well funded capitalists running businesses that would be able to push down wages that way.

@TheConquestOfBed
link
22M

Rich guy: we need to give everyone some money to stimulate the economy.

Commies: who’s gonna fund it, you?

Rich guy: 😅

@ree
link
92M

It’s a liberal perspective on fixing inequalities.

See, instead of envisioning a system where policies are devised at a societal level in order to tackles our needs, it imagines poorness and inequalities as an issue related to purchasing power.

That thinking might build up perverse effect.

Imagine a scenario :

I’m walking 10km everyday to work in the city, and so does my whole village.

The universal basic income (ubi) allows me to buy and maintain really good running shoes. One neighbor can even afford a bike.

In another configuration the city could have dedicated part of its budget implementing public transportation.

The ubi at its core assume that individuals are the key unit, coupled with the whole neo liberal ideology that the “egoistic action of an individual benefit society at large”. One might sees why this idea is getting traction at the moment. It’s an idea that relies on the belief that the “market” will provides for our need. The ubi subsume political process and action by the market.

@jazzfes
link
2
edit-2
2M

I think a UBI can sit in parallel with other initiatives. For instance you can have universal healthcare and education, while still having UBI.

I also think that just because an idea can be perverted, it doesn’t mean that it has to be that way or that there are no positive sides to it.

I’m critical of UBI as a single, silver bullet. However, I do think that there is potential for it to play a role in creating more just societies.

poVoq
link
2
edit-2
2M

Often proponents of UBI say that to finance it one can replace the inefficient provision of other social services, so having both is usually not the argument.

I think what most people fail to understand is that the very basis of our current economic system is to incentivize people to find exploits (see all the talk about “disruptors” and so on). And it is an unhealthy co-dependent relationship with the bureaucratic regulators, who to a large extend justify their existence on curbing the worst excesses of these exploits.

@jonahhw
link
22M

I think when people talk about UBI replacing wellfare, they’re mostly talking about things like food stamps and disability pay. Basic infastructure like public transit and basic necessicities like free universal healthcare and education would not be negatively affected.

@jazzfes
link
2
edit-2
2M

Not an expert in the topic at all, but I believe that in the UBI trials that were run (in Europe?) still had the public healthcare and education system available.

I think UBI can support and make easier some form of social welfare. For instance, in the country I’m living in at the moment, it has been made really difficult for people who have to rely on social welfare to access it. A variety of gates have been created in order to ensure that an applicant “really needs” access.

I believe that UBI would be a much more dignified way of delivering social welfare. However I’m thinking about it really as a progressive tax that starts in the negative and then increases with income, which might be different to what others mean by this.

Don’t disagree with your comment regarding the incentives in the current economic setup… however I believe that at the current stage the regulators rather aim to protect the excesses rather than trying to curb them.

@ree
link
22M

But would we still need ubi if basics social services are provided?

Like if access to housing, food, healthcare, education and culture was secured for all?

@jazzfes
link
22M

I think you still want people to have some freedom for non-essential activities that they can access through their own means.

@Whom
link
82M

It seems to me like a short-sighted way to counter a bit of the visible damage capitalism does. Much like most well-intentioned liberal reform, it starts from the position that capitalism is a fundamental force of the universe that must be worked around rather than one system of many which can be replaced.

That said, I’d be immensely glad to have it. I’m someone who likely will never be able to work in a meaningful capacity, and would benefit from money to not die.

@lovehumanityx
banned
link
42M

I am in support of it.

@2br02b
link
42M

I support it. Studies have shown it has a positive impact on people.

@huginn
link
32M

I’ll just leave Paul Cockshott’s video Why basic income is a bad idea as a reply.

The video quality is a bit janky, but it’s worth a watch. There’s also a blog post of his on this topic.

@Seb3thehacker
link
32M

Sounds good to me although if I got paid $15 an hour and lived in California where things are much more expensive than for example Kentucky, there would be huge incentive for me and many others to leave expensive cities and states. This would destabilize them, as many lower paid people would leave, creating an absence of lower paid workers. I think it should be proportional to the average cost of living. Feel free to prove me wrong though, I’m completely open-minded to everyone’s thoughts.

@pinknoise
link
22M

creating an absence of lower paid workers.

So they’ll have to pay more or lower the cost of living. Both wouldn’t be bad imo.

@Seb3thehacker
link
1
edit-2
2M

True. My logic seems a little broken lol

@3arn0wl
creator
link
32M

I realise that I’m an idealist, but I start from the perspective of basic human rights : Everyone has the right to food, clothing, housing, warmth, etc. Surely our world’s managers, by agreeing to be a part of the UN, have a duty to the UN’s convention on human rights?

But what’s the cost of all that?

And does the administration bill from giving to some and not all outweigh just giving a payment to everybody?

And would the resulting inflation make it all impossible anyway?

I don’t know the answer to any of this : I’m not an economist.

UBI must have a profound affect on the economy though…

@pinknoise
link
2
edit-2
2M

An UBI would have to be financed by taking the money directly from businesses since otherwise they would abuse it. If it’s their money they will lower wages, but it would only really negatively affect people that already have a high income. Companys would have to to pay for peoples lives regardless of if they actually employ them which seems more appropriate for the 21. century where you can, in theory, have an online shop without any (direct) employees.

Directly organizing free food, housing, infrastructure etc. would maybe have less overhead but also be less flexible.

But if I learned something from software development it’s that if you constantly have to patch weird edge cases of your system then it was probably a bad design to begin with…

@downdaemon
link
22M

Universal Basic Worker Control of Industy

@dragnucs
link
22M

It is a noble idea. We need to put more thoughts on it and see if any countries or states are already implementing something similar.

A universal Basic Income would either drive people lazy or way too poor if it is miscalculated.

For example 400 € is more than the guaranteed minimal salary in Morocco, so one can live with it. However, in Europe this would be two to three times less than the guaranteed minimal salary.

@Wilty
link
22M

drive people lazy

Drive people lazy?? Sorry but I can’t even comprehend that statement beyond what capital needs. Lazy is fucking brilliant for the environment and if you have friends also being ‘lazy’ also good for mental health. Next up children playing - lazy little gits get in the mines

@dragnucs
link
12M

This is not what I meant. Understand lazy as unproductive, not partaking in any constructive activity or just being a burden on society.

Lazy is not in the terms of “who I’ll just take a taxi instead of a 5 min walk”.

For example, people can still be active and good citizens, by participating into charities, teaching, and doing what ever they can to help move forward.

@Wilty
link
22M

not partaking in any constructive activity or just being a burden on society.

Lazy is not in the terms of “who I’ll just take a taxi instead of a 5

Understood what you meant - charity - yup totally understand you’re a liberal

@dragnucs
link
02M

I think of myself as a freedomist.

I support the idea. I think you’ll have some people abusing the system and trying to take advantage but overall, I feel it would be a net good.

As a US citizen though, I feel that single payer healthcare is more important to over all health and well being of society.

poVoq
link
2
edit-2
2M

The abuse of such systems is usually a rounding error and pretty much irrelevant. In fact trying to prevent abuse often costs more then the abuse itself is costing (for example in public transport the ticket infrastructure costs way more then the losses from people riding for free).

The bigger problem of “universal basic services” is that you end up with a huge bureaucracy deciding for other people what services to provide. This usually results in many needs not catered to and overall sub-standard services due to neglect and perverse incentives on the side of mostly unaccountable bureaucrats.

Edit: sorry I thought this was a response to the “universal basic services” idea posted further up.

RandomSomeone
link
-42M

The UBI is a huge unnecessary expense in developed countries and an impossibility in developing countries. It is a terrible idea, especially if the aim is to have quality public services. In addition, it can discourage active job search and/or the inability to hire someone. On top of that, the market would simply adapt to this measure by raising prices.

To get out of poverty, stop drowning people in taxes, allow a wide contractual freedom and above all, eliminate the privileges of some oligopolies by completely withdrawing patents (like closed source software) and eliminating millionaire subsidies. In this way, the playing field is balanced by introducing more competition and allowing wages to rise where they need to rise.

@jazzfes
link
62M

To get out of poverty, stop drowning people in taxes, allow a wide contractual freedom

How do you see this working to stop poverty? E.g. lowering taxes generally has reduced funding for public services needed by the poor. Contractual freedom works generally better for those who are in a better position to negotiate, i.e. those who are not poor.

If you have a bill to pay today, kids to feed today, to eat yourself today and are without cash, contractual freedom would drive you to slavery in a minute, wouldn’t it?

eliminating millionaire subsidies.

I agree with this as a measure, however I can’t see how it would level the playing field, given that the rich have been subsidised for decades. To level the playing field, you would need a strong inheritance tax for the top 1%, as well as mechanisms to reverse the re-distrubution to the top that we had going for 40 years.

@dragnucs
link
2
edit-2
2M

There is a plethora of jobs that are going disappear in the future. It wont be about salary but what kind of job.

And if you don’t have a job, how can tax abolition help you?

A loosely moderated place to ask open ended questions

If your post is

  1. Open ended
  2. Not offensive
  3. Not regarding lemmy support (c/lemmy_support)
  4. not ad nauseam inducing (please make sure its a question that would be new to most members)

it’s welcome here!

  • 0 users online
  • 33 users / day
  • 82 users / week
  • 158 users / month
  • 532 users / 6 months
  • 2.14K subscribers
  • 675 Posts
  • 8.66K Comments
  • Modlog