this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
323 points (91.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

29325 readers
3 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Those seem incompatible to me.

(UBI means Universal Basic Income, giving everyone a basic income, for free)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

It has been massively successful in a bunch of locations. Where are you seeing reports that it failed?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maybe it was related to pandemic stuff: https://www.kqed.org/news/11946467/study-shows-limits-of-stocktons-guaranteed-income-program-during-pandemic

It's been awhile since I've looked into specifically anything UBI related so I could be misrembering.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Stockton’s experiment in guaranteed income — which paid more than 100 residents $500 a month with no strings attached — likely improved the recipients’ financial stability and health, but those effects were much less pronounced during the pandemic, researchers found.

“We were able to say definitively that there are certain changes in terms of mental health and physical health and well-being that are directly attributed to the cash,” Castro told CalMatters on Tuesday. “Year 2 (2020) showed us some of those limits, where $500 a month is not a panacea for all social ills.”

Being less pronounced is not the same thing as failing and the whole article supported the program being effective. Looks like maybe you misremembered this article?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

"One glaring problem with allowing this program to exist for any extended period of time is that, unless it is privately funded, it would be too expensive to maintain and would require substantial tax increases across the board.

The group’s page even admits that, saying, “there’s a number of ways to pay for guaranteed income, from a sovereign wealth fund in which citizens benefit from shard national resources like the Alaska Permanent Fund, to bringing tax rates on the wealthiest Americans to their 20th century historical averages.”

I think it part of it may have been related to how high taxes might have to be made and it would be damn near impossible to pass those level of taxes. It couldn't be done souly city by city I don't think otherwise wealthy would flee the city to avoid the taxes levied - at least that woulf be a concern of mine.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What does that blatantly misleading quote come from?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It starts with the assumption that raising taxes is unreasonable.

Bringing taxes up to their 20th century averages is completely reasonable, as they were highest during the time period where actual business growth was the highest.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Do you think the majority of US citizens want higher taxes? There's alot of de-programming that has to be done. Democrats, who are generally better than Republicans when it comes to this stuff (due to the low bar they've erected) aren't necessarily full on board with tax increases.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Taxed at a flat percentage of income or progressively without caps, 75% of people UBI will be a net increase in income over what their taxes would increase. It should be an easy sell unless there is a lot of misinformation or demonizing of low income people.

Of course people also don't understand how single payer would save most people thousands per year by cutting out all the for profit companies, since misinformation is such a problem.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Okay so, there are a bunch of different agencies in charge of different types of social services. If you have UBI, those are no longer required. The money is coming from those programs. You spend LESS because you don’t have a giant work force on the back end of all those services/agencies anymore.

Eg. current: 20 departments, 100 people working at each. Gives out 1 million dollars a year in social services.

UBI: 1 department. Far less than the total of above working for it. Gives out 1 million dollars a year in social services.

See? The numbers are fluff just for the sake of the example.