Andrew Yang's Basic Unconditional Income

Got it! I personally think it will not solve much. Sure, it will briefly make life better. But as we’ve seen before, if people have more purchasing power, they buy more things. And if people buy more things it could raise the prices.

That may result in more resource depletion, waste and inflation. The UBI then always needs to adjust for that inflation. Meanwhile nothing has changed on a structural level. I don’t think we have the luxury of time to consider UBI. Also, when the next economic crisis hits, UBI is the first thing to get cancelled. And then the problems are worse.

What we could do however, is lower the cost of living by providing free solar panels, connected to a local grid and batteries. Basically making energy for free. Introducing an open access economy by providing cheap transportation on demand. Setup vertical farms for cheaper and healthier food. If the money for this is gone, the infrastructure is still there, people can still benefit. This will lower the cost of living and actually provide a path towards an RBE.

UBI is just a patch that doesn’t solve anything. But that’s my opinion of course :nerd_face:

1 Like

I agree, Kees. UBI would be like saying the solution to the monetary system is to print more money.

1 Like

I don’t think UBI should be used as an alternative or stepping stone as it puts price tags on people and makes people a cost. Also, who will pay for the UBI?

I think that access to resources based on the amount effort (avg. hours per day) you put in the system compared to the average might be feasible as a stepping stone, and it should count for everyone, politicians and rich people alike. I have difficulty seeing people working without incentive, maybe someone can enlighten me :slight_smile:.

Also, as we’re currently living in a “capitalist” society, how would we pay our way out of it? I mean, if we need a plot of land, it isn’t free, let alone construction, solar panels, etc. Etc.

1 Like

Indeed, that’s why I would rather support a Universal Basic Need Infrastructure :nerd_face: It provides more jobs, lowers the cost of living and makes us less dependent on monopoly companies, since this infrastructure provides our needs in a decentral and localized way. Making it cheaper, more efficient and less wasteful. In the end it may become so efficient, a pricetag becomes redundant. That’s the ultimate outcome.

Seems like we have 2 threads where we discuss UBI :slight_smile:

This just got in:

It’s in Dutch, but freel free to use a translation service. In a nutshell it’s about that nl needs to cut back costs. STAP and free childcare are being removed. STAP was a program where people could signup for a course and get a 1000 euro discount. Those programs are the first to leave now things start to look bleek. If this was the UBI, things would be worse. Because people may have rented/bought a place with the expectation of having that extra 1000 euro.

While if we used that money to install solar panels with local energy storage, that benefit would continue to benefit society. It would continue to make life cheaper and will pay itself back.

Sorry about all this.

Most importantly I said that I will be away for a few days but hope to resume the conversation about the significance of UBI strategy or lack of it in attaining a RBE society.

1 Like

Also take the urgency into account. We need to shift our economy towards a more sustainable one this decade if we want to limit the worst of climate change. UBI might’ve been great in the 90s, but now we need structural changes that promote sustainability. As a benefit they could make life more affordable. Thus it somewhat still is creating financial relief for those in need.

1 Like

Hello Kees,
As I said last time, I would like to continue our exchange about UBI’s relevance or lack of it.

…shift our economy towards a more sustainable one…
In this context UBI, since it supports only basic needs, it functions as a reward for, and enticement to, shifting to simple personal life styles.
It reduces demand for spurious employment just to secure income.to cover even basic needs.

As to achieving structural change, the majority of people, now locked into wage slavery, would be freed to add to the pressure for those changes (this is one meaning of the socks first metaphor). Without such grass roots pressure, advocates of a RBE society will, I think, be a minority voice.

Does it? You get extra money, that doesn’t mean it will be used for basic needs. Most people in nl don’t need a UBI. And if they get 1000 euro extra per month (which is a number often used in experiments), then most will buy new gadgets, go on holiday or remodel their house.

During the pandemic we already got a small taste of that. People couldn’t spend their money in restaurants and bars anymore. Also holidays were mostly not possible. People were buying tons of stuff with the money they were saving. Which as a result caused inflation of goods because people could ask crazy prices, people will buy that stuff anyway. I suppose this will be the same in most developed countries.

So are we really in need of more consumption, waste, pollution and inflation? If the goal is covering basic needs, then my idea of a universal basic need infrastructure is the way forward. It lowers financial burdens and accelerates the transition to renewable energy and other sustainable infrastructure.

What would be the reason for change? Most people would be very comfortable getting 1000 euro extra per month and just play with their new gadgets and go on nice holidays. We need a value shift. That is not going to happen by giving people more money. If that was the case, then the wealthy people would be leading this transition. That doesn’t seem to be the case, check the topic title :nerd_face:

I think it’s a bit of wishful thinking. If the goal is a transition towards an RBE and help people financially, then let’s talk about subsidies for solar panels and store the energy in local power grids. Then the next step are vertical farms, next one maybe 3D printer centers and free research centers, etc.

Not quite sure how to proceed here. we obviously have differing perspectives.
I don’t know about nl but in Britain and America the proposed UBI is about getting people off the poverty line (half of Americans have no saving to meet minor emergencies).
I have time and energy to be active here because my basic state pension. Without that most of my concerns would revolve around making ends meet.

Universal basic income is part of the whole systems reform that TZM/VP/RBE implies, as I see things. This is what I had in mind in saying before Without such grass roots pressure, advocates of a RBE society will, I think, be a minority voice.

By the way, as a matter of information, do you share the view that part of the breakthrough is a money/exchange-less distribution system?

That’s also addressed with a universal basic need infrastructure, like I mentioned; free solar panels and neighborhood energy storage. Considering the energy prices of today, that could save hundreds of euros per month for people. Just handing out money to people won’t make them activists in my opinion, like I mentioned, then rich people would be activists. We need a value change. For that a different environment would help, one that’s more sustainable.

If we can transition towards something like that because it’s technically possible, then of course! But basic income isn’t that. You can basically see it as “quantitative easing”, it promotes consumption to boost the economy. More GDP means more pollution, greenhouse gases and waste. If we want to transition towards a sustainable economy, then we need to focus on just that.

But indeed, that’s just my view on it. I personally really don’t see UBI solve anything. It’s just a way to keep things as they are for a bit longer, delaying real and pressing solutions.

1 Like

Thanks, Kees.
I can not match your speed of responses, so will reply within the day (24hrs :slight_smile: hopefully).

No worries, there is no need for a synchronous chat here :wink: Please note that we do have an app, so you can also reply on the go, if you want of course.

UBS is an alternative many people favour. Behind this is the thinking, it seems to me, of not trusting ordinary people to spend money wisely.
Who would decide the range of services to grant to people? Give people solar panels, for example, rather than money with the freedom to decide not to spend it that way…
Well, If I were a worker on minimum wage I would have to make sure that the rent is paid while waiting for the savings on my electricity bill show up.
I mean, cash payments are the emergency response to people on the poverty line.

You are right " Just handing out money to people won’t make them activists" but it would make them more free to be activists if they do decide. And with UBI there will be groups of activists to encourage other economically free people to become activists on behalf of RBE restructuring.

In fact, this paper argues that there is a resource based economy but its benefits are captured by the top richest members of society .

(By the way, I hope that we can think of our exchange here as exploration rather than argument to prove one side more right than the other. )

1 Like

Note I’m talking about a localized energy grid. It’s not that only a few people get these panels. It’s about providing energy independence for a whole neighborhood. Not everyone can have panels. The thing is, we can plan independence by applying technology the right way. Or indeed we just hand out money and see what we already see.

To be honest, both won’t happen. Consumers in nl also have to figure it out themselves. Everyone needs to buy their own panels and batteries. Not efficient.

Of course! :nerd_face:

In that spirit, I would like to hear your responses to the paper by Gar Alperovitz. The I link is in the previous post.

We don’t have a RBE now. We use resources, of course. But we don’t base our economy around them. If that was the case then we wouldn’t measure our economic success in how fast we can produce products and consume them. Instead it would be more efficient, long lasting products with repairability built in. Earth overshoot day wouldn’t be earlier every year either. We use up many times over of what the Earth can provide. We treat the planet as a single use product. We have a market economy, based on consumption. Not preservation.

1 Like

A resource-based economy plans its decisions taking into account the available resources, their care and how to guarantee their sustainable consumption over time.

At present, our economy is based on profit, without adequate planning to ensure the points that I named. Instead, almost all resource consumption is permitted indiscriminately and incentivized by profit. Although there are some regulations in different countries, sometimes they are not followed due to corruption, which is inherent in the current socio-economic system.

It would be useful to know what you call a resource based economy, so that I can understand what you mean and what it has to do with the article you recommended.

1 Like

I think it’s best to have some sort of incentive system, like the amount of hours per day you put in the system compared to the average per age group / gender for example or even compared to the average as a whole. Everyone has the same amount of time available per day, but not everyone is able to spend as much time on the system (kids, care, etc.). The more you put into the system, the more you can get out of it, but not by a lot. But, basic needs (food, clothing, housing, heating, electricity, water) should either be really really cheap or free due to massive efficiency innovations (which we are already seeing rough traces of in the form of AI).

How could we setup a proven system, being so distributed, sparse and (definitely in my case) busy? What would that system look like? What does the system do, and what does it not do? How does it interface with capitalism? What other groups could we become friends with?

What you seem to prefer is a capitalist system under a social democratic principle.

This explains a resource based economy:

2 Likes