907
submitted 11 months ago by zephyreks@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago

Uh, the key issue is that it's very unclear whether the results will hold at scale, since you're suggesting a modification to society. There's no (or very little) social component to the effectiveness of a vaccine or a new tool. Money is fundamentally a social construct and so what works in isolation or very small groups might not work the same way at large scale.

If a country with a population of around a million (or even as small as 100k) enacted UBI I would take those results to be representative of a societal change. So far I've only seen studies where a few people embedded in a larger society are given money, and that's not the same thing.

You have to remember that industrialized countries already have a systems where people get money for "nothing," but those quotes do a lot of psychological heavy lifting. Disability, unemployment, retirement, food stamps, etc. The difference being that it's not universal and each payout is either "earned," temporary, or a pity case. As such, the psychology behind that money just isn't the same.

I'm interested in UBI, I just want to see results that can actually be reasonably transferred to a population the size of my country (350 million) before I make hard statements about its effects.

[-] elouboub@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

If a country with a population of around a million (or even as small as 100k) enacted UBI I would take those results to be representative of a societal change.

I honestly doubt you would. The typical arguments of:

  • it's not comparable to a country of 350M, they're barely as big as $cityWithOver1Million
  • their society is very different from ours
  • their implementation is different from what we could ever manage
  • the circumstances were different

would come around.

You're making exemplary conservative arguments to stalemate progress by creating a chicken and egg problem.

  • Won't accept results of change in a small environment because they aren't representative of change in large environment
  • Demand results of change in a large environment before applying them to large environment
  • Won't apply changes to large environment because results of change in large environment don't exist
[-] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago

You just made up a bunch of arguments I would never make. Please don't put words in my mouth. I can't help it if my current stance is an argument made by people who have no interest in UBI at all. Fuck, I want UBI to work as advertised, it would be a very simple and easy solution to a lot of problems (though it obviously wouldn't be a 100% solve for all of them).

If we can get a small economic zone that's in control of its own currency to run UBI, those results would be likely to transfer to any other larger economy. Really the only requirement is that the country must be in control of its own monetary and fiscal policy and the program must actually be universal.

this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
907 points (96.9% liked)

World News

32037 readers
745 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS