Here’s my problem with your model. How do you prevent corruption on determining which goods are subsidized, and by who? If you give cash out, the free market will at least prevent the worst excesses. In a subsidized system, if the governer’s brother opens the world’s worst daycare at the taxpayer’s costs, what incentives does he have to provide anything resembling reasonable service? And how can anyone compete with that daycare when they don’t have a family member in government?
At the present time, Billy’s parents will take Billy to the A Childcare service and, if it’s no good, they may switch to B and give their $X to B instead.
in my model, Billy’s parents will take Billy to the A Childcare service and, if it’s no good, they may switch to B and the government gives $X to B instead.
What’s the difference again? The economic decision for the parents is the same in other case since zero minus zero is the same as $X minus $X.
Yes, I’ve oversimplified … but so have you.
It might eliminate dead end entry level jobs, but low paid entry level jobs with a clear path of advancement for most who make an effort would solve this problem.
In the old days people could start in the mail room, learn the company, and advance from there. Now the mail room is probably outsourced so there is no room for advancement.
This especially applies to craft jobs, since the proposal would make internships possible for not just the wealthy who can survive on no pay.
It would eliminate entry level jobs because people would be faced with a choice of staying home and getting high and earning the UBI or going to a job and earning the UBI plus a small amount. Not enough people would choose the second option. Faced with a lack of labor, businesses would have to automate those jobs. There would still be part time jobs or jobs like Uber but those are the least likely to lead to advancement.
How are they going to afford the drugs to get high without a job?
Once again, you are entirely missing the point. Businesses are already automating these jobs, it is not a lack of labor that is the problem, it is a lack of jobs that is.
Honestly, if the choice is to prevent companies from automating to make sure that some people still have low paying low skilled jobs, or allowing companies to innovate and automate in such a way that those jobs will no longer be necessary, why do you feel the first choice is superior?
And if someone wants to sit at home collecting UBI and spend their time working on a book or a painting or a musical composition, then that’s great. That’s something that a robot cannot do, that only a human mind with idle time away from the stress of survival can do.
People keep trying to say that businesses won’t have employees with his model, when the entire reason for this model is that many businesses will not need employees. The businesses that do need employees can pay what an employee feels is worth their time, as opposed to the current environment, when a business will pay as little as they can get away with, as they know the employee cannot quit easily.
Why would people choose to stay home and get high (and how do you know they’d have enough money to “get high”, when the UBI is just enough to pay for rent and food)? Wouldn’t people also want things like video games, better food than the bare minimum, decent furnishings, TV and entertainment, etc. – all of which would require working, even if it were only a handful of hours per week?
The same way that they do now - improvisation, the black market and criminal activity. Some of you are wayyy too optimistic about human nature. Not everyone will do that of course but a lot will just because they are bored and they can.
But that is not them sitting around on UBI and getting high, that means that they are out working, even if the work is not of a legal sort. They could instead get a legal job to pay for their drugs.
I am not optimistic about human nature, I am pretty realistic when it comes to it. But people are not going to pick the harder, more dangerous and illegal method of getting their drug money, that’s not what humans do. They are going to pick the easy method, and that is going to get a job.