I don’t know how relevant this is now, but here’s a link to another post where I expressed my thoughts on what kind of pitfalls you might most likely face – https://lemmy.world/post/36867409

By the way, what is this phenomenon on Lemmy? Let’s say people are reluctant to read and comment on old posts published just a couple of days or a week ago, but with new ones, it’s a completely different story. What kind of psychology is this? Or it seemed to me?

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    3 hours ago

    People still get their freedom of spending their UBI as they desire, although some of their existing expenses could be deducted before they receive UBI payment (e.g., child care payments). From a policy selling perspective UBI looks very attractive, especially when you start receiving payments of it for a while. So much so that people would not stand it going away.

    Oh, absolutely. Look at the success of Social Security.

    I don’t think specific help programs should go away mind you; I hear that sometimes but I disagree with that perspective.

    The libertarian pitch for “negative income tax” typically boils down to “if people just have cash in hand then the market will provide”. There’s never any real introspection into how markets work in practice or why certain neighborhoods are flush with amenities while others are barren.

    Maybe some of the UBI could be in a currency that’s only spendable on food (like food stamps), so in those rare cases the money potentially still goes to buying food.

    I would rather simply have state-run food pantries with staples provided at-cost. You get a UBI check. You have a public grocer/kitchen with affordable foodstuffs. Most adults can take it from there.

    Anyone who isn’t able to properly maintain a household on those terms will likely need more real physical social assistance than an incentivized cash-substitute program can provide.