• Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why not just guarantee those things for everyone?

    Guaranteed housing, guaranteed food, guaranteed clothing. No work required. I agree with you, I think most people will still work with all of that taken care of. Because it’s just basic.

    • Infynis
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s what a universal basic income does. It’s way simpler and more likely to succeed than a hundred different programs for everything people need. Studies show that poor people, when given money, don’t misuse it, like some would have you believe. They use it on things they need, but otherwise couldn’t afford, like housing, healthcare, car repairs, things like that. It’s even good for the economy

      • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m sure there are already answers to this question l, but wouldn’t a basic universal income lead to some inflation/price rises?

        I live in the most expensive city in my country and rent is insane. It’s not about finding a cheaper apartment or a smaller one because there are none or you won’t get them. They are not taking in a family of three into less than a three room apartment and sometimes even three room apartments are considered too small for a family with one little kid. And to be clear, if you are long term unemployed, the government pays for your housing. Theoretically. You still have to find a suitable apartment and there.are.none.

        I would much rather have someone provide me guaranteed housing for free than to fear that my basic universal income will at some point not even be enough to cover my rent, even if it is just “basic”. But to me, “basic” in this sense would equal survival. It would mean housing, food, healthcare. I much rather take these things directly than make use of a small amount of money that will always be too little and end up having to choose between the cheapest cereal or the cheapest bread because I cannot afford both this month. Money and freedom to spend it as you wish is great, but I just cannot imagine how this would work. Apartments won’t magically keep their prices or appear out of thin air.

        I’m sorry if this comment is too focused on housing, it is just the most anxiety evoking example I have. (And also we are moving in two weeks so maybe I am a bit preoccupied.)

        • MNByChoice
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am sure there is an official answer, but I am going to wing it.

          Inflation is from too much money chasing too few goods.

          UBI will free you from having to live in a specific place. Or if not you, some of your neighbors.

          Guaranteed housing tends to be shitty. Think of the worst people running the program and them hitting the lowest standards most times.

          With money, you can decide the housing trade-offs. Save money on rent and spend more elsewhere, or the reverse. With money, you have flexibility.

          • Wogi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Guaranteed housing tends to be shitty.

            Except there’s no reason it needs to be.

            It can be good, and there are parts of the developed world where public housing is not only abundant, but decent. And it has a cooling effect on the housing market, making all housing more affordable for everyone.

            If we provide, decent, low cost housing to enough, everyone that needs housing prices to come down benefit.

            • MNByChoice
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Except there’s no reason it needs to be.

              Sure. We could setup regulations, have inspectors, an oversight board, a series of escilating fines, and both local and federal authorities ensuring that each other is don’t the right thing. We would get mostly decent housing. Sounds expensive.

              What happens when you need a bigger place, or don’t need as much? Want to get away from a loud neighbor, or closer to work? Sounds like forms and approvals. Time off work for meeting with authorities.

              Current housing programs have huge waiting lists, and are different for different cities/counties/states. I am sure it works well for some people that made it through the paperwork and line.

              All of that send worse than giving people money.

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who says the market can’t operate there? Providing a basic version of anything doesn’t mean an organization can’t compete. They just have to compete with basic. Most people will want something better.