this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
1156 points (93.6% liked)

Leftism

2477 readers
3 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 111 points 2 years ago (4 children)

There have been some pretty extensive studies that indicate that when you give poor people money, they become less poor. When you give poor people enough money to live on, they stop being poor. It’s a radical concept, but it’s also the truth.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 45 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

I read a study arguing that each time someone utters the letters U, B, and I, currency devalues itself by one thousand fold, chunks of the sky rain down on metropolitan centers, and everyone instantly becomes fat, lazy, and uninterested in any activities except playing video games.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yup I died because you said it, so thanks for that.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If not myself, then someone else. Blame the system, not the individual.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

If it had to he anyone, im glad it was you!

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To be clear, I have no issue with most people working while others do not and live off the system. I think most people will still want to do that something.

UBI isn't going to do that.

You can point to a handful of small scale studies that show more money works, and yes, on a small scale that is exactly what you'd expect to happen.

This does not work when everyone has that same income. It's not a matter of 99% of people making smart choices, because I concede that the vast majority of people with sudden access to additional income would spend it wisely.

The issues are twofold.

A) when the people who've made it their career to suck every penny out of every possible person know that there are suddenly more pennies to be had, they're going to raise prices. It's frankly foolish and shortsighted to expect prices to remain the same or only raise a little. This issue is not raised with small scale experiments. So regardless of their obvious success, they're not telling the whole story.

2). UBI does absolutely nothing to address the problems it's actually trying to solve. All it does is print a check every month as a bandaid for some serious problems that will certainly persist. You can't fix housing without building housing. Individual healthcare will still be tied to your job. College education will be prohibitively expensive and require staffing a lifetime of debt, and we'll still throw away an obscene amount of food, and people will still go hungry. The only thing that will probably get better is more children will have a secure diet.

And none of that assumes prices would inflate the way they absolutely will. Because even if UBI happened, the people who want all the money the working class has aren't suddenly going to think it's ok to leave dollars unspoken for.

The cost of college will steadily increase by about the amount kids are expected to have been able to save by the time they get there. Rent prices will go up to accommodate the new found freedom of spending. And that's the stuff you have a choice on. You think Comcast will see people with so many extra dollars a month and think "well our customers don't have another option but we'll let them keep all that money?"

UBI is just a ticket to absolute dependency on a government check for 99% of Americans, and less financial freedom.

Address the actual problems, don't just slap a half baked bandaid on it

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The claim of UBI leading to runaway inflation is a myth given by reactionary propaganda.

UBI would represent a major advance for the working class. Advocating against it seems impossible to reconcile with any attitude that is not accelerationist.

Much of your commentary seems to reproduce mythical tropes such as of the "welfare queen".

Seeking meaningful contribution to society is a robust human tendency. Doing so under constant threat from greedy employers is not necessary.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 15 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Yeah UBI would solve this. This might be a criticism of contemporary capitalism, but it isn't a critique of capitalism more broadly because in principle, capitalism can have a UBI.

More fruitful anti-capitalist critiques emphasize workplace authoritarianism, the employer's appropriation of the whole product of a firm, monopoly power associated with private ownership especially of land and natural resources, and inability to effectively allocate resources towards public goods

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A strike can last much longer if workers are not worried about their bread and roof.

Even without organization, a secure worker can bargain harder for higher wages and better conditions.

[–] kevinbacon@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Aaaaand there it is, the reason they fight so hard to keep you from that security.

Nonviolence won't solve this.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I hope that the worst kinds of conflict prove avoidable, but historically, there is always someone who fires the first shots.

The Haymarket affair illustrates the matter quite well.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Rights are won with blood, not money; those with money need no rights, and those who need rights have no money.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Even a UBI specifically for food- food stamps for all- would make a massive change and improve millions of lives.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

In principle, and even in it's intended general practical application, I agree with you.

But in America, I can see both parties getting on board with a UBI, only because they'll use it to gut all other social welfare programs.

Need healthcare? UBI

Hungry? UBI

UBI can't pay for both at once? Tough shit. We abolished EBT and Medicare to pay for UBI.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

All must be won by struggle. Elites never surrender privilege only by being asked.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago

EBT is a flat 200 a month at most and the ongoing application process is humiliating Kafkaesque bullshit I wouldn't wish on anyone after experiencing it, so I think it would work just fine to shut it down and fold it into a UBI, would be nice and simple and without complications. Health insurance on the other hand, cost varies wildly by circumstance but is generally more expensive, and because of incentives, price negotiations, all the bullshit involved with the system would be way more efficient and cost effective to have a universal healthcare program instead of giving out money to buy into a private insurance industry.

Fortunately, this seems to be recognized in most serious discussions about UBI. Almost everyone quickly acknowledges that the idea of replacing healthcare programs in particular with UBI is stupid. The UBI proposals I've seen that got any attention were explicit that it does not replace those. I don't think it's realistic they would actually try to replace Medicare with UBI.

[–] Phrodo_00@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

South American experiments with printing money make the studies hard to believe. You can't simply give people money without causing a devaluation in said money. You have to take it away from the market somehow (so, tax the shit out of the rich)

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You can't simply give people money without causing a devaluation in said money.

The government surely can.

The government has the power to levy taxes.

The government has comprehensive powers for regulating the value of currency, through control over the money supply.

At any rate, the government printing money for workers cannot possibility be worse for workers than the government printing money for businesses, as it is doing now.

I suppose, though, you might take comfort in how inflation now is being so effectively prevented, instead of causing needless human suffering.