this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
985 points (92.8% liked)

Memes

45894 readers
1137 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 84 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

UBI is kind of cool but it has some massive flaws. For example: Landlords and groceries can just raise prices to bring the cost of living up and since there are no rent/price controls (because "that would be communism") we'll be right back to where we started. What you want is Universal Basic Services. Anything you need to live is free. Literally impossible for anyone to game that system and equally impossible for people to slip through the gaps, but it's also never going to happen because "that would be communism"

So yeah this is why capitalism has go to, because any attempt at actually making a just and fair society will be dismissed as "being communism"

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 65 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Landlords and groceries can just raise prices to bring the cost of living up

Sigh. People make this braindead argument every single time this subject comes up. No they can't. Markets do not work that way. It's literally just a repackaged argument against minimum wage and it has been thoroughly debunked in that context.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Unless you live in a city with rent stabilization, yes landlords will do that. Groceries will likely not have that problem, because of other market conditions. The first to increase their rents will be luxury apartments. Once the Internet is done laughing their asses off about $5000 rent, other landlords will use realpage to gauge the market and increase in tandem. Landlords literally do not care if their property is occupied, because the money is in the land and we've commoditized housing.

[–] F_this_stuff@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Don't try to mischaracterize me. For UBI to work, we need national rent stabilization and significant efforts to build non-market housing across the nation. I'm not against UBI, but it can't just be added without other changes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] trailing9@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

Have you seen how housing prices rose when interest rates were low? Markets work that way because consumers outcompete each other, at least in the housing market. You need a surplus of supply, like the corn market, to keep costs low.

Like @espi wrote, you need fierce competition in all markets.

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

It becomes more and more meaningless when you start to talk about any form of regulation or extension of basic rights. Plenty of countries are coming around to the idea that housing is a basic right. It's hard to raise prices when your competition is literally free. UBI + market regulations + basic human rights are all required. No solution exists in a vacuum and anyone who considers it as such is missing the point

[–] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We literally just witnessed this with COVID shutdown. Im not sure why you think people getting handed money will not increase pricing as that is usually how things work.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We should do away with using money for necessities. You want a pool, pay for it. A safe and sanitary living space? Free. Stop making people rely on something with no inherent value.

[–] Atonable0659@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

How do you determine what is a necessity and how much of that necessity is free?

Is electricity a necessity? Should it be free for everyone? Should the person who owns the massive mansion get it all paid for? If we say its only for a certain amount of electricity, does the person who doesn't use all of their allocated amount get compensation somehow?

What about food then? I don't think anyone would think lobster and caviar should be free. So let's just do food basics like cheese. Artisan cheese is expensive. So we need paid for artisan cheese and basic government funded cheese product. So now we have a two tier food system where poor people live off gruel and soylent green, while the rich can afford real food.

The only way to solve these issues is to find agreed method of representing value that people can use on what they want.

No one can complain that someone else is getting something for free, because they also get the exact same thing. No one can defraud the system because everyone gets the exact same cheque. Well, unless you bump off grandma and collect hers too.

[–] reinar@distress.digital 3 points 1 year ago

safe and sanitary space in Manhattan can cost the same as mansion with a pool somewhere else.

With current global world simply existing in attractive locations could be luxury.

[–] Johanno@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago

So you want to tell me that companies aren't buying out competition and with a monopoly they then rise prises as they want?

Explain to me how markets work if the only company selling or renting houses is not lowering their price when demand lowers? Or when they intentionally are not renting flats in order to keep demand high?

[–] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We should get rid of landlords either way of course. Don't even need UBI for that. Also get rid of billionaires.

[–] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The ideas of „you can only own a building you live in“ and „companies can’t own residential buildings“ keep popping up in my head. Any reason that can’t be the solution?

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Any reason that can’t be the solution?

Capitalist brainwashing and status quo warriors?

[–] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

The fact that if you need to rent you can't because who do you rent from and where do they move to?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] trailing9@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you want to rent, who owns those buildings? One person who lives there?

[–] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

I don’t have a definitive answer for that. Right now I‘d go with that, yes. The goal would be to move away from renting as you age. Everyone should own their living space sooner or later. There are options for this. Where I live you can rent-buy something. It’s renting but you also reduce the price you‘d pay for buying it. It’s very rare though afaik.

[–] bappity@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

gigabit internet should be free for everyone imo

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's super frustrating that my state banned the ability for cities to have municipal internet, it makes organizing to make gigabit Internet a municipal utility much harder

[–] bappity@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that is batshit insane what good reason would there be to ban it

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Because telecom companies secured their monopoly after a whiff of community organizing

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

I wish all cable cartels a very Nationalize that shit

[–] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah, why TF is the internet so shitty in US? I get 500 Mbps down/10 Mbps up for $80/month. It's disgusting. I'd rather have 100 Mbps symmetric. Or better yet, 500 Mbps symmetric. My parents pay around $20/month for that, and they live in rural India. Even they got fiber, but I have to deal with fucking coax cables. The only local provider with fiber and symmetric speeds doesn't operate in my side of the town. Why does everything in US have to be designed to fuck the end consumer? It's really frustrating.

[–] Kase@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the closest thing we have now in the us afaik is public libraries, but even those aren't getting much support these days :(

[–] bappity@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

must be even more annoying with that stuff about book banning in some states!

[–] Espi@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

UBI is a way to make capitalism more fair. One important fact about capitalism that seemingly everyone forgot is that competition is a requirement for it to work.

If there is fierce competition in all markets, even if everyone is getting UBI, price hikes are impossible.

[–] samson@aussie.zone 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a fantasy though. An extremely competitive market would be nice, but in reality it would be a race to the bottom and those who started with more cash would win out, buy up or starve the competition and monopolise, giving them the extra space to be lazy and pass on profits to their shareholders, who dictate increased prices to increase their margins.

[–] trailing9@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's where you have to tax monopolies.

Monopolies will resist but it takes only some expropriations to motivate shareholders that they push for law-abiding behavior.

[–] samson@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This doesn't stop anything though again. Unless you tax them out of business, they will still be a monopoly and will fix prices for their profit. Less profit is still profit.

If you tax them too high they will either seek recourse via illegally bribing politicians (or "lobbying") to have those taxes removed, or monopolise with legally distinct businesses where wealth is concentrated in the few regardless.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Malfeasant@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Landlords and groceries can just raise prices to bring the cost of living up

They already can, and do. If they do it too much, people leave that area. With a UBI, there's nothing that says you have to live in a big city, it would be easier to move to bfe, where it's always going to be cheaper. It's not ideal of course to uproot and leave, but it's possible, and it's that possibility that keeps prices somewhat under control.

[–] akariii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

unless you have conditions that require you to have quick access to hospital, or doesn't allow you to work in physically intensive labor like farms, or require certain infrastructure like elevators and access to wheelchairs, etc. i can see that working for some people, but not for everyone. and the people that would be left behind could be dramatically affected by this situation

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Moving to more rural areas is what causes rural areas to build hospitals, and doctors to open clinics and offices. There are plenty of jobs everywhere that just involve sitting on your ass in front of a screen, or standing behind a counter. Even in rural areas.

Growth doesn't just happen. People have to go places and build. UBI would make that process a shit ton easier.

[–] akariii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, sure... but it's hard to build specialized medical facilities for people who need them in every rural area they decide to live, right? and it's basically impossible to keep them running when there's only a few people that will need them in that area, no? at some point, the places they can choose to live will be heavily informed by the disabilities they may or may not have.

eventually, you will probably end up with highly concentrated areas of people who have similar disabilities that can be treated in that area (as well as their loved ones, medics/physicians, people who provide food, transportation, etc...).

I don't want to come across as against UBI, I think it's a very interesting first approach. but I also definitely don't believe it's a solution by any , you see...

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It turns out the specialized medical needs are kind of special, and they fly people to where there are facilities when they're needed. And only affects a special portion of the population. For everyone else it doesn't matter.

For fuck sake people crossed the entire US in a god damn wagon while risking being shot at by random tribes and eaten by bears. What's stopping people now is that they can't afford food or a place to park the damn wagon without getting harassed by the cops.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For the very problems you stated, I'm in favor of UBI. Capital would take some time to adjust to the new system and for a moment, misery would be alleviated for a metric shitload of people. When it's ripped from our hands by greedy capitalists, it could act as a unifying, radicalizing force and bring us closer to a revolution. There's a loooot more to it than my few sentences. But a UBI given to everyone with no means testing would be an objectively good thing. And its a bit like Pandora's box. Once it's here, you can't take it away without serious social ramifications. I'll leave a couple of articles that touch on this because it's something the left ought to be taking more seriously, however I haven't had a chance to read the two of them all the way through yet. I'm at work and things just got busy but here ya go one, two

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I like the idea of UBI too. I hope it happens and that we transition into a UBS model once its success is shown to the world. That being said it's important to front that with me not being in support of the neofeudal UBI that silicon valley techbros push for. That would be a disaster.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Hard agree on all points. It's a bit of a bummer that Andrew yang of all people was the one to start the national conversation about UBI because his whole deal just pollutes the discussion from the jump

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It did at least introduce the concept to a lot of people, especially to those who have otherwise never have heard of it.

Kind of like what Bernard Sandman did. He introduced people to a bastardized version of socialism but that still got people talking.

[–] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Also for a guy with a Math pin he ignored key parts of the UBI research he used for his position and repeatedly misrepresented the figures in it.

The projection that the economy would grow because of UBI was in the part of the Roosevelt Institute study that posited the money would just appear from the sky whereas the growth rates projected from tax financed UBI were almost zero as would be expected.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

I felt like it should be paired with government contracts for something akin to a private dorm room (room, cafeteria with meal plan, laundry, computer lab, wifi, etc.) that negotiates a price that is then what the ubi is pegged at. Folks are guaranteed being able to have at least that option or can utilize it for something else.

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Anything you need to live is free. Literally impossible for anyone to game that system

Let me introduce you to government corruption

[–] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've never heard of UBS before, I hope it takes off

(I mean it absolutely will take off... in a post capitalist society. Hopefully it takes off long before then though)

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can do your part by fighting for socialized housing (tenants collectively own the property and rent goes to upgrades) and municipal cable. The rewards are well worth it. You don't have to (and shouldn't) wait around for a bloody revolution to fight back against capitalism. Every little thing you can do to wrench power from the capitalist class even something small like joining a union helps a lot if we all do it.

load more comments (1 replies)