[GT] US election - It's 2020, what could possibly go wrong?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Sure, whatever you say. Not like there are studies to back him up... https://www.jainfamilyinstitute.org/...d_the_City.pdf

... Ultimately though, I actually think you're partly right. While the studies, pilot programs and expert opinion all suggest that it won't result in a sudden spike in rent, there's really no way to know. Everything about UBI, implemented society-wide in a country of 300 million people, is pretty much wishful thinking. There's no way to accurately predict exactly how markets will respond, or whether the health care benefits will be as good as advertised, or whether the expected economic stimulus will work the way proponents hope it will, or whether people will actually become more geographically and economically mobile. It's a best guess.

But given that the best guess is, "lots of stuff we want to happen will happen, and the bad stuff that seems like it could happen doesn't actually tend to show up when we look into things more closely or do actual real-world testing", maybe it's more reasonable to support the measure than to allow those hypothetical problems for which there's no actual support in practice to act as obstacles.

Have you noticed that your local McDicks is a tad slow these days? they have no staff, that's because right now we are paying UBI due to covid and no one wants to work at some rubbish low paid job so they cant keep staff, eventually McDicks will have to massively increase wages and prices to compete with UBI, and then we have inflation.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Seriously, WTF?

Isn't this him admitting that no, it totally won't work for renters?

Sounds like nothing but fearmongering to me.

“OMG this is a new idea which doesn’t fit the ‘reduce tax break’ model, it won’t work “

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I mean nothing is really going to work until there's a concerted effort by more jurisdictions to implement some form of rent control.

which then reduces the housing pool as renting becomes less profitable and so less people decide or can afford to be landlords, it being a income source that requires a huge initial investment and risk

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I mean nothing is really going to work until there's a concerted effort by more jurisdictions to implement some form of rent control.

Agreed, but good luck with that when the local politicians are so heavily influenced by real estate developers and political campaign contributions (at least here in the US).

I'm open to UBI as a concept. I just don't see how it improves things for your average joe when the system is currently set up to transfer wealth from the lower income groups to the higher income groups.

The fact that there has been no effective refutation of the "jack the rent" scenario indicates to me that it's a simplistic answer to a much more complex problem.

As a society we'd be better served to take tax money and put it into free education and health care to lift people up, than cash that even Yang acknowledges a substantial portion of will go straight into the pockets of the wealthy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Have you noticed that your local McDicks is a tad slow these days? they have no staff, that's because right now we are paying UBI due to covid and no one wants to work at some rubbish low paid job so they cant keep staff, eventually McDicks will have to massively increase wages and prices to compete with UBI, and then we have inflation.

Oh no, companies might have to start paying their workers a living wage instead of exploiting their labour? The horror.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yeah, I'm getting the sense that these inquiries weren't actually good faith attempts to get answers to real questions.

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Have you noticed that your local McDicks is a tad slow these days? they have no staff, that's because right now we are paying UBI due to covid and no one wants to work at some rubbish low paid job so they cant keep staff, eventually McDicks will have to massively increase wages and prices to compete with UBI, and then we have inflation.

Um... No. I haven't noticed that.

Are you contractually obligated to post something completely ridiculous and idiotic daily? It's like clockwork with you. Amazing.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Oh no, companies might have to start paying their workers a living wage instead of exploiting their labour? The horror.

yes but then they have to put up the price of the product to pay for the wages, which means the UBI and the living wage are eaten up by the inflation they cause, its economics 101

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Have you noticed that your local McDicks is a tad slow these days? they have no staff, that's because right now we are paying UBI due to covid and no one wants to work at some rubbish low paid job so they cant keep staff, eventually McDicks will have to massively increase wages and prices to compete with UBI, and then we have inflation.

Or it could be that demand for the product is low and they’ve reduced staff accordingly.

Do you know their books to know which is actually true?

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Sounds like nothing but fearmongering to me.

“OMG this is a new idea which doesn’t fit the ‘reduce tax break’ model, it won’t work “

Can you buy a fixer upper for $3000? Even if you are willing to have 3 families live in it?

It was an insane statement. I get it's off the cuff, and he's not reading a policy doc, but it made no sense.

The onus is on him to relay a strategy that makes sense.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Agreed, but good luck with that when the local politicians are so heavily influenced by real estate developers and political campaign contributions (at least here in the US).

I'm open to UBI as a concept. I just don't see how it improves things for your average joe when the system is currently set up to transfer wealth from the lower income groups to the higher income groups.

The fact that there has been no effective refutation of the "jack the rent" scenario indicates to me that it's a simplistic answer to a much more complex problem.

As a society we'd be better served to take tax money and put it into free education and health care to lift people up, than cash that even Yang acknowledges a substantial portion of will go straight into the pockets of the wealthy.

I'm not sure how it works in the U.S., but couldn't States start implementing tighter restrictions on rent-gouging? Here in B.C. there's a formula that essentially ties rent increases to inflation and some other factors. For instance, in 2020, landlords were only allowed to increase rent by 2.6% (and they're only allowed to increase it once per year).

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Can you buy a fixer upper for $3000? Even if you are willing to have 3 families live in it?

It was an insane statement. I get it's off the cuff, and he's not reading a policy doc, but it made no sense.

The onus is on him to relay a strategy that makes sense.

However the onus is not on him to address every single “what if” criticism that can be dreamed up.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Or it could be that demand for the product is low and they’ve reduced staff accordingly.

Do you know their books to know which is actually true?

oh no they cant keep staff right now, the demand hasnt changed, the line ups are around the block, I dont even blame the kids, no one would work a #### job if they had the money not to but those jobs have to be done

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by calculoso

However the onus is not on him to address every single “what if” criticism that can be dreamed up.

He was the one that said it!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Can you buy a fixer upper for $3000? Even if you are willing to have 3 families live in it?

You can rent one for less than that. You can also pay a mortgage on one for less than that. And if it's 3 families living there, it's a lot more than $3000, because UBI is on an individual basis, not a family basis.

Ultimately, the point is that if you have this money in your pocket, you have additional housing options, which increases choice, which in turn limits the amount landlords renting apartments can actually raise rents without sending tenants elsewhere. But I'm sure you knew that.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

yes but then they have to put up the price of the product to pay for the wages, which means the UBI and the living wage are eaten up by the inflation they cause, its economics 101

That's not necessarily true and is very much an old-school, supply-side economics approach. Companies are only going to increase prices to a point where demand won't drop off. McDonald's isn't going to start charging $20 for a cheeseburger because their workers suddenly make $3/hour because they know people won't pay that much.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'm not sure how it works in the U.S., but couldn't States start implementing tighter restrictions on rent-gouging? Here in B.C. there's a formula that essentially ties rent increases to inflation and some other factors. For instance, in 2020, landlords were only allowed to increase rent by 2.6% (and they're only allowed to increase it once per year).

There are to many ways around that, the basic one being not renewing the lease after a year, keeping a constant stream of tenents flowing through

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

oh no they cant keep staff right now, the demand hasnt changed, the line ups are around the block, I dont even blame the kids, no one would work a #### job if they had the money not to but those jobs have to be done

Maybe in your neighborhood. There is less of a drive through line up anytime I drive by one, and that is even with the “dine in” option not available

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

That's not necessarily true and is very much an old-school, supply-side economics approach. Companies are only going to increase prices to a point where demand won't drop off. McDonald's isn't going to start charging $20 for a cheeseburger because their workers suddenly make $3/hour because they know people won't pay that much.

yes but as everyone is being paid more they will pay 20 dollars, that's literally how inflation works, you have more money so you are prepared to spend more money

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

oh no they cant keep staff right now, the demand hasnt changed, the line ups are around the block, I dont even blame the kids, no one would work a #### job if they had the money not to but those jobs have to be done

You realize you've just kind of contradicted your own argument though, right? McDonald's hasn't attempted to raise their employees' wages and thus their prices to compete with CERB or whatever. They're just happy to make their customers wait a bit longer.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You can rent one for less than that. You can also pay a mortgage on one for less than that. And if it's 3 families living there, it's a lot more than $3000, because UBI is on an individual basis, not a family basis.

Ultimately, the point is that if you have this money in your pocket, you have additional housing options, which increases choice, which in turn limits the amount landlords renting apartments can actually raise rents without sending tenants elsewhere. But I'm sure you knew that.

Alright, I'll shove off then. Until someone can answer how UBI solves basic questions about wealth distribution (which he didn't in the video you provided, and I tried to break down with time stamps as to why), I can't say I think I could ever support it. I'm open to having my mind changed.

I don't see the need for MSNBC to give a platform to a candidate who can't refute a pretty basic criticism.