Universal Basic Income - pro.s and con.s

[Larry of the Lawn]

I would take universal healthcare over UBI in a heartbeat.  

[Liffguard]

8 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

I would take universal healthcare over UBI in a heartbeat.  

One good thing about both is the way that they give more power to employees over employers. If you know your health will be taken care of no matter what, that's one less thing holding you to a bad job.

Which reminds of another alternative to UBI that I find intriguing (sorry if it's already come up, I haven't read the whole thread), Universal Basic Services. The idea being that rather than paying everybody cash, you set up public services that provide for everybody's needs. So e.g. nationalised healthcare free at the point of use, extensive public housing available to anyone who needs it, free or heavily subsidised public transport, some kind of public food program. Whilst not the same as cash, you could still ensure that everyone gets a secure dignified life, and the ability to walk away from any job without having to worry about starving on the street.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

1 minute ago, Liffguard said:

One good thing about both is the way that they give more power to employees over employers. If you know your health will be taken care of no matter what, that's one less thing holding you to a bad job.

Which reminds of another alternative to UBI that I find intriguing (sorry if it's already come up, I haven't read the whole thread), Universal Basic Services. The idea being that rather than paying everybody cash, you set up public services that provide for everybody's needs. So e.g. nationalised healthcare free at the point of use, extensive public housing available to anyone who needs it, free or heavily subsidised public transport, some kind of public food program. Whilst not the same as cash, you could still ensure that everyone gets a secure dignified life, and the ability to walk away from any job without having to worry about starving on the street.

Healthcare, I think, has enough proof of concept in one form or another. 

I live in a city with heavily subsidized public transport (and I think there are some European cities where it is free, maybe just for residents?). I think it probably works pretty well in densely populated areas (in non pandemic times) where there are efficiencies/economies of scale. I don't think it works well for dispersed/suburban/rural populations. There is a LOT to unpack on this one, but I think as a blanket solution it is probably a failure.

Free public housing is probably ultimately problematic.  I think the reality is that such housing would quickly deteriorate in quality and safety. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be pushing for much better housing policies.  But I'm not confident freely available public housing is the way to go.

I think public food is equally problematic - there's a lot of cultural control and other coercion that comes through the provision of food like that.  The SNAP wars over what SNAP benefits can be spent on are only just the beginning.  

[Martell Spy]

4 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

I would take universal healthcare over UBI in a heartbeat.  

Yeah, I would, too. I also think raising the Minimum Wage is a more effective policy for confronting inequality in the current day than UBI. And getting to a true UBI would definitely take actions that just aren't feasible in the short-term or even medium-term. Nationalizing industries for example is one of the ways it could happen. It does seem likely down the road as capitalists continue to discredit themselves. with unwise and sociopathic actions.

I do think there is a place for a cash benefit though. And I do think it's a good idea to capitalize on the popularity of the stimulus checks. Keep in mind this America, where any sort of government benefit gets hugely racialized. So there is a political value to the fact that the stimulus checks are popular. At a minimum I'd like to see stimulus checks triggered automatically when the unemployment rate reaches a certain level. 

I haven't brought up slashing Military expenditures yet. And the reason is that slashing them is a fantasy some liberals/leftists have and it's not really polically viable right now for various reasons. However, if there were actual regular cash benefits already in place, be they yearly or monthly or whatever, it would become a conversation in our politics if we should either raise cash benefits or continue pumping money in to the war machine. It might become more real even to conservative or low-information voters if they have to choose between Iraq War 3 or more cash benefits.

[Altherion]

4 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I think public food is equally problematic - there's a lot of cultural control and other coercion that comes through the provision of food like that.  The SNAP wars over what SNAP benefits can be spent on are only just the beginning.  

I highly suspect that the SNAP restrictions are the work of something along of the lines of one of the demons from Good Omens. Even in the typical scenario, the person trying to use them at the supermarket basically needs to check out twice: once with the SNAP card and the again with an ordinary credit card or cash (for all of the ineligible items). In the worst case scenario, the person trying to use SNAP and the cashier disagree on what qualifies for SNAP and spend some time arguing while all of the people waiting in line get angrier and angrier. It's a complete waste of time and not just for the people receiving benefits, but everyone shopping in the same stores.

[Inkdaub]

I was unemployed years ago and had SNAP.  I never had any problems at the register.  I once had to wait for manager approval that the Coke I wanted to buy was not an energy drink.  Otherwise I pretty much knew what I couldn't buy.  Prepared food, liquor or beer and apparently energy drinks were not allowed.  I will admit that the checker sometimes let me buy a rotisserie half chicken which technically would not count.  I would only try that once or twice a month, though.  You needed to spend those SNAP benefits on cheap food in mass so you had enough for the entire month.  A few treats is okay but mostly a pretty dull month of food.  I was happy to get it, though.

 

 

 

[Lord of Oop North]

On 1/27/2021 at 8:59 AM, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Not only do I love my job, but I’m probably less of a menace to society gainfully employed doing what I do as I do it.  Idle hands are the something something.  BTW, there are positions open in my quasi-benevolent post-apocalyptic democratic dictatorship.  You can invent your own GAAP if you want, but I’m open to other ideas. 

Indeed. If it wasn't gainfully employed in construction management, I would most certainly find that the next best place for that particular set of skills would be as a Crime Lord.

[OldGimletEye]

20 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

In the short term, MMT gives a veneer of legitimacy to even more fiscal debt, which is how everything will be financed for a while.  A few years ago I was advocating a $1trn infrastructure budget; soon I’ll be shamed for the paucity of my ambition.

In a prior post, I mentioned Heinrich Bruning.  In the late 1920s, Bruning would have saved Germany, and likely the rest of the world, a whole lot of pain, had he simply money financed government spending. In certain situations, like the Great Depression in Germany, there is a case to be made for money financed (as opposed to traditional bond financed) government spending.

MMT theorist makes some claims that are true, In certain cases, expanding the monetary base won't cause inflation. But, then some of their proponents seemingly want to suggest that MMT can be a solution to our financing issues. The way I see it bond financing allows you to defer taxes to later, whereas money financed spending means you have to raise taxes sooner. MMT theory is no panacea to financing issues, even though some on the left think it is.

When they are criticized, MMT theorist are quick to say, "we'll that's not what we meant". Part of the problem is they don't give any type of formal model. Thomas Palley, who is an economist who is left of Krugman, being associated mainly with "Cambridge Keynesianism" wrote in frustration:

Quote

This question can only be answered by placing that power within a theoretical model and exploring its implications...Proponents of MMT have a professional obligation to provide [a simple mathematical] model to help understand and assess the logic and originality of their claims. Yet, [MMT proponents Eric Tymoigne and L. Randall Wray] again fail to produce a model...If MMT-ers did produce a model, I am convinced the issues would become transparent, but readers would also see there is “no there there”.

After there GFC there was a lot of criticisms that economics was too mathy. It's true that fancy mathematical equations don't turn mystical thinking into reality. However, mathematical equations are clear and precise. Mathematical models commit an author to a certain version of events. They can's say later "well that's not what I really meant". With a couple of equations, you can get a sense of what the model is about, much quicker than reading reams of paragraphs. MMT theorist decline to give a simple and parsimonious model.

Anyway, yeah, I don't trust the MMT hype.

[Alarich II]

On 1/29/2021 at 9:12 PM, Chataya de Fleury said:

I can launder money. (NOTE: have never done so, but I do know how.)

 

Haha, that disclaimer is so American! In my professional life I've had two visits by the good people of our customs and duties task force (clients from certain Balkan states who own companies in the building industry will do that to you) and they are very polite and professional, but they will not accept even a cup of coffee.

I think most accountants will have a pretty solid idea how money laundering works. But - like tax fraud - when the accountant sees it, it's already too late to hide...

[Mlle. Zabzie]

6 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Well, like tax fraud, if a layperson does it, it is already too late to hide. 

If we do it (HAVE NEVER DONE SO!!) only someone really good would ever know.

This is probably the reason that fake tan places still operate, but seriously, from a general business perspective, one has to know that fake tanning should be on the downslope.

However: car washes and nail salons. Even in the pandemic, still doing well. Or real estate if you have the time frame. 

Real estate serves multiple purposes.  Trust me there are jokes about the huge Central Park condo buildings over the past decade.....LLCs are mysterious things and our KYC processes are still $hit.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

30 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Yeah, buying real estate to “keep the privacy of the buyers” is interesting. I don’t know if every state has that. 

“KYC” is “Know Your Customer” for those who do not regularly see the acronym (US bankers, stockbrokers, and attorneys do, most people even in the US would not know what this was immediately.)

LLCs are Limited Liability Corporations, which can be used for....anything, really. Including in my real life, one’s airplane registration. Or, in other cases, one’s condo. One is not easily find-able hiding behind a single-purpose LLC.

One minor correction - LLC is “limited liability company” (taxed as a pass through:)) and not “corporation” (which are limited liability by their natures :)).

[Alarich II]

15 hours ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Or real estate if you have the time frame.

Real estate and corporations in Malta. Even better - Maltese corporation, owned by a trust in f*ing Delaware (seriously, from a European POV, Delaware is probably even worse than the Caymans) holding Real Estate in Frankfurt. Yeah, nothing to see here, just move along Sir. 

[DMC]

2 hours ago, Alarich II said:

Even better - Maltese corporation, owned by a trust in f*ing Delaware (seriously, from a European POV, Delaware is probably even worse than the Caymans) holding Real Estate in Frankfurt.

But do they hold the falcon?!?

[Mlle. Zabzie]

4 hours ago, Alarich II said:

Real estate and corporations in Malta. Even better - Maltese corporation, owned by a trust in f*ing Delaware (seriously, from a European POV, Delaware is probably even worse than the Caymans) holding Real Estate in Frankfurt. Yeah, nothing to see here, just move along Sir. 

Not sure I’d do that, personally.  You’re not saving any German RETT based on my understanding.

[Alarich II]

23 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Not sure I’d do that, personally.  You’re not saving any German RETT based on my understanding.

RETT really depends in wether it's a share or asset deal, but if it's a share deal, then RETT is circumvented by having your spouse buying a 5,1% share (well, not quite that simple, but close enough without being too technical). The foreign domiciled corporation circumvents trade tax, so you only pay 15% corporation tax. Also, it is advisable to own more than 300 units, because then you'll be considered a real estate Business for inheritance tax purposes, which means you get to chose between 85% to 100% tax exemption (some strings attached).

Delaware ist just in there to make my life as a small town tax lawyer miserable.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

1 hour ago, Alarich II said:

RETT really depends in wether it's a share or asset deal, but if it's a share deal, then RETT is circumvented by having your spouse buying a 5,1% share (well, not quite that simple, but close enough without being too technical). The foreign domiciled corporation circumvents trade tax, so you only pay 15% corporation tax. Also, it is advisable to own more than 300 units, because then you'll be considered a real estate Business for inheritance tax purposes, which means you get to chose between 85% to 100% tax exemption (some strings attached).

Delaware ist just in there to make my life as a small town tax lawyer miserable.

Yeah, I’m mostly dealing with large corporate transactions, and you can’t really get rid of the RETT. Still not sure I’d put a US person in the loop but eh, I don’t really do individual planning.  It is a statement of absolutely certainty, however, that almost every deal I do has a horrifying German issue.  Don’t even get me started on German-registered IP.  Also, the trading fund rules for PE are weird.  MLPs everywhere like Christmas ornaments....

[Alarich II]

7 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

It is a statement of absolutely certainty, however, that almost every deal I do has a horrifying German issue. 

Well, tbh, horrifying issues are our export speciality (ask our neighbours, when they hear "the Germans are coming" they'll ask on wheels or on tracks?), so that's hardly surprising.

[Which Tyler]

Just bumping this due to side-track on the UK Politics thread. Though IIRC this thread was itself side-tracked by talking almost exclusively about how impractical anything would be in the hyper-capitalist American dystopia.

 

3 hours ago, mormont said:

This is something of a derail, since it's not a live issue in UK politics right now. If folks want to start a new thread (or resurrect one? I think there might be one) that would be appropriate.

I would just comment that work being a good thing in and of itself isn't an 'ideology', as such - it's well understood in psychology and HR that this is a fact. Work provides all sorts of non-economic benefits to people, from social to existential, and most of us would work to obtain these even if all of our material needs were met. Now, what kind of work and how much of it we should do and how it should be structured, those are fair questions.

But you also get those same benefits from volunteering, and many of them by working on your passion.

and of course, UBI doesn't mean "There's no work" - it means you're not a wage-slave doing something you hate (and don't get those befits from) in order to be able to buy food. You've got a safety-net to try something different, to volunteer, to work on whatever craft you fancy, but can't sell enough of to make ends meet...

[mormont]

5 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

But you also get those same benefits from volunteering, and many of them by working on your passion.

Sure. These are also types of work. Work, in this sense, doesn't necessarily mean 'paid work'. It means structured, meaningful activity, often co-operative but not always, but generally contributing to the needs of others as well as yourself.

The thing is, it's perfectly possible to decouple money and work. UBI is one way of weakening the link. Capitalism as it currently exists in most of the world isn't the only possible way to run a society - but work does exist in all societies.