Hello, I’m not that informed about UBI, but here is my arguement:

Everyone gets some sort of income, but wouldn’t companies just subside the income by raising their prices? Also, do you believe capatilism can co-exist with UBI?

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    10 days ago

    Your theory about companies raising prices to offset UBI is actually undercut by historical and present evidence.

    There was a time when the United States had welfare. The United States still has food stamps. But nobody is seriously pretending that these things did or do drive up grocery prices.

    Similarly, over time various states have raised minimum wage, and if your argument were accurate, then the prices in those states would have immediately risen to match minimum wage, but they didn’t.

    In other words, you’re repeating a conservative talking point that has been repeatedly debunked by reality. I think you could try to improve your argument by arguing that inflation happens across the board, to everything, and therefore it would also happen to UBI. But what we’ve actually seen is that’s not true.

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      my country has started a program a few years ago that gives a lot of money to couples that produce children, primarily to be able to afford buying a house. it has contributed to many problems, from convenience marriage, to parents literally not caring for their children, but maybe the worst of all is that it has raised property prices by the exact amount of aid received for producing 2-3 children.

    • Big_Boss_77@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      The only counter to this argument I’ve seen play out in real time (at least to the best of my knowledge, it could be propaganda) is the fact that when the government offered tax credits for EVs, Ford raised the prices of their EVs to essentially absorb the tax credit and profit off of what was supposed to benefit the people making the switch.

      I’ll see if I can find the article I’m remembering.

      Here is one link from the daily wire

      Here is another from tech times

      • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        I think that’s a difference between subsidizing specific things vs subsidizing all the things.

          • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            Not so much volume, but just the different options available. Example, if food is subsidized, then food vendors can increase prices to soak up the excess. But if people just get money, and food vendors try to soak it up, people can spend their money on building a greenhouse and growing their own vegetables. If every industry tries to raise prices, at some point it becomes worthwhile for people to do things themselves, then trade with each other, undercutting the larger industries. Basically, the libertarians’ wet dream could actually happen with UBI.

    • Wiz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      Thank you for this argument. I had found that mentally I was getting trapped in this line of thinking about UBI.

      My way around in my mental way if thinking it was Universal Basic Medicine, Universal Basic Food, Universal Basic Housing, and so on. That way, if some jackass landlord decided to raise rent too high, you’re not homeless. Also, in my ideal world, the health insurance industry should be “taken out”.