> And maybe - just maybe - it's time everybody took another look at the UBI debate, again.
Doesn't UBI directly result in inflation and cause currency devaluation? If the money that you hold loses its value (because everyone has at the very least the same amount of money as a basic, consistent income) then it is worth nothing in the end. It is as good as having no money in my humble opinion. Money has to be valuable for it to be useful in trade. Giving away money to everyone devalues the currency.
Here is a pretty good article that assumes that you have zero knowledge and talks about how UBI could be implemented without any more inflation than we already have.
It addresses a lot of concerns about UBI in a very accessible way. UBI isn't a new concept and it has been well studied. (It was almost implemented in the USA as a more streamlined alternative to the byzantine welfare state, but the Democrats sunk it.
UBI redistributes money. The total amount in circulation doesn't change. So the deflation argument really comes down to: if everyone has money, no one has money. I don't think that's the case. Even in the unrealistic case where we all have the same amount of money, we wouldn't spend it on the same things and that fact alone is a moderating force on inflation. Prices reflect people's ability and willingness to pay. In cases where we are forced to buy the same things, like housing, healthcare, and education, prices are out of control anyway.
You would have to implement it in a way that redistributed wealth, i.e. increase marginal tax rates.
The goal is to make sure everyone is housed, fed, and educated. One option is to just give them housing, food, and education. Another is to give people money and let them choose. Yet another is to loan the money and to put them in debt forever.
The goal is to make sure everyone is housed, fed, and educated. One option is to just give them housing, food, and education. Another is to give people money and let them choose. Yet another is to loan the money and to put them in debt forever.
It's a noble goal. What about exercising the option of personal responsibility and agency of choice? (D) none of the above.
What about it? From what I can tell, people would rather choose to live in countries where there is some social contract regarding a minimum quality of life rather than Somalia.
Yes, but nowhere near the amount of inflation caused by allowing Wall Street and consumer banks to create trillions of new dollars with artificially low interest rates. Plus if we had more price inflation on consumer goods it might actually reign in the Fed, and make them stop ignoring the ongoing rampant price inflation for assets.
Doesn't UBI directly result in inflation and cause currency devaluation? If the money that you hold loses its value (because everyone has at the very least the same amount of money as a basic, consistent income) then it is worth nothing in the end. It is as good as having no money in my humble opinion. Money has to be valuable for it to be useful in trade. Giving away money to everyone devalues the currency.