How would UBI be the solution if landlords and insurance companies followed suit and raised their prices?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Andrew Yang suspending his campaign
- Thread starter Halbrand
- Start date
How would UBI be the solution if landlords and insurance companies followed suit and raised their prices?
Have you just recently started watching politics or something? Hillary staffers in 2008 sent around a picture of Obama in an African dress and turban trying to paint him as a Muslim. Hillary supporters literally created a group called "Party Unity My Ass". Obama routinely came out and called Hillary a bullshitter who is out of touch in front of live audiences. The 2008 primary was much, much worse than any lightweight attack Bernie has put out against any candidate. What hallmark?
Okay, I didn't get that feeling from the post I was quoting, but I see.
Yeah, I never quite got the reasoning as that would mean any wage increase would be "detrimental" too
Not really since you can't really determine who will have more money or not. With UBI, everyone gets 1k every month, so what's to stop all landlords from raising their rents by $900?
Knowing some people are making more is enough to know someone can afford the raised rent, even if it isn't the current tenant
When minimum wage goes up, most people tend to see some sort of wage increase. Like if minimum wage went up to $15 there are a lot of jobs that offer $11 and 12 that would then have to offer $17-20 to seem impressive.
Also that.
There's still money at the top of company. Lack of money is not an issue if we can distribute it equally, by for example laws that restrict how much money a CEO can take out from the company, having having free healthcare, education etc.
And prices have been going up for everything - including rent - despite wages staying roughly the same, so making a step towards more redistribution of wealth by increasing minimum wage, is only the first step.
The rich gets richer, so it's time they share what they have gained from the people and the government.
...How do you think UBI works? That would cost an immense amount of money and would have to happen through some fairly high taxes.
Steyer is polling well in SC. He wont quit before super tuesday or a horrible result on SC.
It's still a looot less money for regular people to have 1k, versus getting free healthcare and education.
I'm not saying UBI is a bad idea, I think it would be awesome if we get it in the future to ensure less anxiety and more freedom for people (I'm all for Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism), but in today's world where everything is designed around Laissez-faire capitalism, it would just be a bandaid and lip-service for the ultra rich who don't want the workers to gain any more power.
UBI would work in a world where we have enough regulations to prevent millionaires from becoming billionaires. In a world where you can work 4 hours a day and share the workload with other workers that control the marketplace together.
I liked yang. Might not have voted for him but he was the only interesting thing about this dreadful primary
Yeah ultimately that's why Yang wasn't going for M4A or canceling student debt. Too expensive to do all three.
actually the REAL reason you support welfare over a universal basic income is because you're secretly planning to rely on byzantine requirements and machine learning based methods of approximating protected classes based on other correlated factors in order to exclude marginalized people from receiving benefits
you thought your alleged self-proclaimed commitment to progressive ideals would keep you safe from dumbfuck projection? this is the internet, babey!!
but at least my awful posts are ironically bad
It's not too expensive to do all three at the time with the right taxation and regulations, but if you can't do all three at the same time, free education and healthcare, and cancelling student debt are way better long term solutions than slapping a UBI bandaid on.
there's objective criticisms of yang's plans to be made! other people even already wrote them, it would probably take less effort than coming up with your own conspiracy theories
maybe this is just a function of me not hanging out with very many white people, but all the yang supporters i know are poc - not that this magically absolves him of his flaws, but maybe, just maybe, you can engage with the substance of why people might have different opinions than you on what the ideal progressive policy is
i could probably come up with a reason for why supporting every single candidate actually means you're awful, but we're not on twitter so i fail to see the point of such reductive dunk scoring
maybe this is just a function of me not hanging out with very many white people, but all the yang supporters i know are poc - not that this magically absolves him of his flaws, but maybe, just maybe, you can engage with the substance of why people might have different opinions than you on what the ideal progressive policy is
i could probably come up with a reason for why supporting every single candidate actually means you're awful, but we're not on twitter so i fail to see the point of such reductive dunk scoring
Why don't landlords and insurance companies raise their prices now? Their customers must have some income they use on non-essential things compared to rent and insurance fees. Or why don't they raise prices when the minimum wage goes up, or if they find out a tenant got a big promotion, or if they know some people have some savings?
The answer is the same reason every business ever doesn't just immediately raise prices to people's average income. People can go elsewhere to the business who is charging less, rather than charging more. This is the basic idea of competition. Businesses are generally selfish and want to maximize profit. They would love the opportunity to get sales at the expense of another business who raises prices too high.
You can also look at the behaviour of businesses for every basic income experiment done anywhere and see that this irrational and self-harming business behaviour does not occur, but the explanation above should really be sufficient.
the "choose between welfare and a universal basic income" bit makes a little more sense when you realize that, oh, most people don't qualify for welfare, and even less will once conservatives get their machine learning classifiers fired up to find excuses why certain people don't deserve welfare
and given how the response to a flat $1000 for all is enough to get people to dive into the welfare queen rhetoric, it will be easy for them to sway self-proclaimed progressives into making welfare programs as exclusionary as possible
for someone so curious you sure are adverse to thought, huh?
and no, i don't think his plan is ideal! the amount is too low and he leaned too hard into trying to appeal across the isle, but i'd prefer if you didn't slander the policy because you dislike the man who proposed it based on shitposts you read online
again, save that sort of needlessly aggressive posting to farm clout over how allegedly progressive you are for twitter, please
People are "dodging" it because it's wrong. Don't get caught up in what you think the left-wing orthodox line is.
Plenty of jurisdictions have implemented higher minimum wages. They didn't become paradises. The standard of living for minimum wage workers improved a bit, and, depending on how high the minimum wage was, some businesses would hire fewer people. It's an old, busted policy.
Basic income would be revolutionary. Including for people who can't work, want to spend their time on starting a business instead, want to stay home for childcare, whatever. No one knows what the best form of UBI would be yet, but Yang's proposal is a start.
"everyone who has a minor disagreement with me online has a malicious agenda: the poster's guide to the internet, 2020"
Not to sound dismissive, but if version of capitalism was true, then US wouldn't pay more for healthcare than any other country in the world.
It's oligarchy all around.
Sure, oligopolies and monopolies exist. In industries where competition isn't allowed, it's easier to raise prices since people have fewer alternatives. But I'm not sure why that's a problem of basic income or any income-raising measure (although even in the worst-case scenario, health insurers wouldn't do well raising their prices by the amount of UBI). It's something to be solved with other reforms.
I support UBI as a PART of the welfare state. Not Yang's version, which largely replaced existing social programs.
Still, I feel like Yang was a solid guy, and the field is 100% worse off without him. He had some positions (anti-abortion and anti-porn, what?) that I didn't go for but I feel that, unlike a grasping climber like Pete or a monster like Bloomberg, the dude believed in his own campaign. He was genuine and passionate. I'd like to see him in a Sanders administration. I think he's a great fit for Secretary of Labor.
Still, I feel like Yang was a solid guy, and the field is 100% worse off without him. He had some positions (anti-abortion and anti-porn, what?) that I didn't go for but I feel that, unlike a grasping climber like Pete or a monster like Bloomberg, the dude believed in his own campaign. He was genuine and passionate. I'd like to see him in a Sanders administration. I think he's a great fit for Secretary of Labor.
Yang had some very good ideas, but with the media bias towards him, and his lack of confidence, experience and willingness to fight in debates is what cost him.
To win the presidentcy you have to have more then just good ideas.
To win the presidentcy you have to have more then just good ideas.
Ah, I wasn't aware of this. Dude seemed to have some pretty good talks and views on a lot of things but reading what he said makes me understand why he backed out. Hopefully he can shift his understanding of the movement and then help support positive changes down the line
ubi is a much stronger solution than a minimum wage increase but i support both.
minimum wage doesn't do anything to combat job loss and automation, in fact, it speeds it up, (which is also a good thing but only if ubi exists). it also doesn't give people breathing room to pursue higher/continuing education and side businesses, or value stay-at-home work like ubi would.
rents and prices on other things might increase slightly with either a minimum wage increase or ubi implementation but not by much. landlords are still in competition with one another.
UBI is a good policy, but it needs to be paired with nationwide rent control, M4A, and ensuring that the other services that folks rely on don't get shut down to afford the above-mentioned UBI. That's why Yang's version of UBI was deficient and ignorant.
This is why I have always felt that enforcing strict regulation of proprty rental costs is more important than increasing wages. Although we should be raising wages as well.
Don't you guys have laws where rent can only increase a set percentage per year? Like no more than 2% usually.
RIP to the funny meme man
Pour one out for Bennet too cause he ain't getting his own thread lmao
It was never intended to be a substitute. It was only there to help, much like how receiving welfare isn't a substitute for losing a job.
He's said he will back whoever the Democratic nominee is, but then went onto brow beat Democrats for vilifying Donald Trump, which seems pretty consistent with the "both sides are problematic" ideology of his outsider base.
I shouldn't say brow beat... that's too extreme. He went onto .. uh .. I dunno, equivocate between vilifying Donald Trump and focusing on new ideas, is a nicer way to put it, I guess.
I'd imagine he won't make many public statements for a little while, just cool off like most candidates do who drop out. Though, unlike most of the other candidates who suspended their campaigns, he's not beholden to an establishment or party to come out and endorse someone. Other than his small minority of passionate supporters, nobody really cares who Andrew Yang wants you to vote for, as opposed to a senator or congressman who has had millions of people vote for them and donate to them over the last 5, 10, 20 years.
Nixon froze prices in 1971 by declaring a wage price freeze.
You are straight lying. Yang originally pitched it as specifically a substitute for other welfare programs and only walked that back when people actually paying attention called out how stupid and useless that made it.
I'm confused. First you were asking why UBI would be worth it when landlords could raise rent, now you're saying they already raise rent regardless, so now I'm not sure what your argument actually is