I could imagine that society being full of all sorts of different problems than the current one.
For example if people moved away from cities it would be a huge negative impact on the environment.
You would also have a new underclass that simple lived off assistance and refused to work. The costs of living would probably also skyrocket such that whatever basic level of income you set would be the new poverty line.
The problem with assumption is that UBI must only do good. It won’t. It will have all sorts of negative effects on top of the positive ones. An easy one to foresee is people taking their UBI and gambling it away.
The vast majority of people couldn’t just live off basic income. Maybe a single person, no kids, no drinking, no house, no car, and living very frugality might be able to not work.
Though the premise of the post above mentions a UBI that does allow one to live without having to work, comfortably enough to also pursue passions instead.
I mean, there are plenty of sci-fi concepts where there is widespread UBI, and what it means is you have large portions of the population unemployed and permanent on assistance and employment is only for the social elites.
Which is to say when you raise the floor, you also raise the ceiling.
UBI that has been used IRL is often highly targeted to select population groups (like single parents, or in a single municipality). It’s never been widespread.
and of course any wide spread UBI, would be a quick reason for landlords, food companies, etc, to simple raise prices and pocket it, thus defeating the purpose entirely.
Yeah I think to your final point, some type of price increase regulations would have to come out parallel. Not sure how that would work but interested in learning.
I could imagine that society being full of all sorts of different problems than the current one.
For example if people moved away from cities it would be a huge negative impact on the environment.
You would also have a new underclass that simple lived off assistance and refused to work. The costs of living would probably also skyrocket such that whatever basic level of income you set would be the new poverty line.
The problem with assumption is that UBI must only do good. It won’t. It will have all sorts of negative effects on top of the positive ones. An easy one to foresee is people taking their UBI and gambling it away.
The vast majority of people couldn’t just live off basic income. Maybe a single person, no kids, no drinking, no house, no car, and living very frugality might be able to not work.
Though the premise of the post above mentions a UBI that does allow one to live without having to work, comfortably enough to also pursue passions instead.
How realistic that is, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
More than not having to work is not risking to lose where you live and being hungry.
Yeah I’m interested in exploring that
I mean, there are plenty of sci-fi concepts where there is widespread UBI, and what it means is you have large portions of the population unemployed and permanent on assistance and employment is only for the social elites.
Which is to say when you raise the floor, you also raise the ceiling.
UBI that has been used IRL is often highly targeted to select population groups (like single parents, or in a single municipality). It’s never been widespread.
and of course any wide spread UBI, would be a quick reason for landlords, food companies, etc, to simple raise prices and pocket it, thus defeating the purpose entirely.
Easy fix: public housing only for rental and public supermarkets.
Yeah I think to your final point, some type of price increase regulations would have to come out parallel. Not sure how that would work but interested in learning.