Register to vote: https://vote.gov
Contact your reps:
Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?Class=1
House of Representatives: https://contactrepresentatives.org/
Register to vote: https://vote.gov
Contact your reps:
Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?Class=1
House of Representatives: https://contactrepresentatives.org/
A few thousand dollars a year is an order of magnitude different than a few thousand dollars a month. Shits already expensive in Alaska because it’s remote.
Incidentally a handful of studies are several orders of magnitude different than actual UBI, and would similarly fail to showcase the problem.
Again- if you have robust laws against price gouging, there is no price gouging problem.
Robust laws also prevent the need for UBI in the first place. If we can’t figure out how to run a society without it, slapping UBI on top of that isn’t actually going to fix anything.
You’re making no sense. How is giving everyone the financial help to keep them clothed, housed, fed, etc. without needing to work for it not going to fix anything as long as you prevent price gouging?
Ok, let me recontextualize here. “if we can terraform mars, why wouldn’t we migrate because of climate change on earth?” In that scenario, why wouldn’t we fix our climate?
If we have the power to regulate pricing, why would we need UBI?
It’s socialism with extra steps. You can just do regular socialism, you don’t need to enshitify socialism with capitalism. You really don’t.
Because no matter how low priced something is, someone who has no job still can’t afford it.
So, provide the necessary things. Provide housing, medical care, and clothing to anyone that wants it, doing so will probably be necessary for price controls anyway. I’m not saying those things should be unobtainable. I’m saying UBI is a dumb way to go about providing them.
So all food should be free? Or should poor people only be allowed to have certain foods for free but rich people can have anything they want to eat?
I think basic needs should be met, and if you want something better than that you’d need to pay for it.
Yes, perfect is indeed the enemy of adequate, and UBI seems imperfect as long as you can invalidate the studies. If you need help, there are easy talking points from your local Conservative bootstraps trickle-down rep.
Do you agree with
The first three examples are UBI by another name. The last example is proof that providing support doesnt lead to abuse; unless lighting your house on fire is sport in your town!
But maybe those studies are flawed, like climate change models and laws of quantum physics. But those turned out to be close or too conservative (climate) or were refined with added study (physics). A UBI plan, like any other, isn’t set in stone; who hid that from you when you first heard of UBI, and why?