I see arguments against UBI, that it's just the ruling class trying to remain in power, that your landlord will just raise rent by that much. Couldn't the same arguments be used against raising min wage? See, here's my thing, I think UBI would just be the capitalists desperately putting the system on life support but why are leftists so against UBI but not against raising min wage? You're not a liberal, you know better that you can't vote for or against either one. If those in power conclude that's what they need to do they'll do it. It won't matter if you agree or disagree or who's in office. To me that seems like one of those societal contradictions like Mao talks about. Under fuedalism those in power were naturally the only ones with the power to change society, but they had no incentive to so they did what they could to remain in power as long as possible, but ironically the way they solved those contradictions either changed society or set the stage for societal change.

I just can't get worked up about UBI one way or the other, that's not a materialist way of viewing it. A materialist way of looking at it would be to figure out, is this going to be what the ruling class conclude to be the way they stay in power? If so, what effects will that have on society?

  • JonathanKington [none/use name]
    ·
    3 years ago

    While rent control is good, the rent problem isn’t a thing that actually exists. Rents didn’t go up $1400 this March when the stimulus checks hit. Rents did not go up $300 a month overnight last month once the Child Tax Credit kicked in.

    Isn't the issue that these types of things tend to take years/decades and we've seen things like minimum wage and other social services seriously lag behind? I don't know enough about Yang's UBI to know if there's any mechanisms to combat this, but I feel like we'll just eventually see a scenario where UBI is painfully insufficient and politicians drag their feet about increasing the "burden on tax payers" etc.

    • DetroitLolcat [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I honestly don't know enough about the second or third-order effects of UBI or direct cash transfers decades down the line. Yang's UBI proposal - while a net good - had serious problems when it came to other social services lagging behind, but there's no reason the left can't both organize for UBI and against welfare cuts at the same time. It's not a zero-sum game.

      What we do know is that direct cash transfers historically have lifted millions out of poverty in the immediate term, and I don't see the point in fretting about second and third-order problems that won't manifest for years or decades when these policies do so much good in the short term. If those problems manifest years down the line, we can organize against those problems when they happen.