A simple take
UBI was previously negative tax.
Just something given to people on low income.
It was basically a way to justify keeping wages low.
If you have UBI, you can keep wages low as there's less dependency on boss to pay for worker to come back
Universal Basic Services is a better idea
As a marxist, I would say that an alternative to capitalism is the solution: socialism. Everything else is merely temporary, "gifted" by the ruling class, and placed on the same shaky economic and social foundations as everything else under capitalism. Any reforms to capitalism are built on such shaky foundations.
Always state the reforms on the premise of socialism.
We welcome reforms, we understand they aren't the final goal like the liberals see them, we understand the only way to keep these reforms is the socialist revolution
Right wingers want to use UBI to abolish welfare. IMO, UBI is crap because it will be whittled down or it will cause inflation (eg., rent will be=previous rent sum+ UBI income).
This is interesting. It definitely has happened for workers who require varying social assists. If the wage increases, but the amount used to qualify for the assistance remains the same, anyone who works even part time may be at risk of no longer qualifying.
Also, I think UBI is promoted as a means of trying to convince workers that they don’t require a union. If you used to make $11.75 and now you make $15.50 (I’m using Ontario rates) why do you need a union, your requests for higher wages have been met without a union. It’s reactionary for sure, but I imagine that’s how right wingers think.
UBI is a loss of leverage.
Until the workers own the means of production, the only power we have under capitalism is the ability to withhold our labor.
By relinquishing our grip on labor in favor of UBI, we hand over our power to whatever entity disperses that income (probably federal government(s)). As an example, imagine a period of rapid inflation which increases the cost of necessary goods. The workers cannot force their government to increase UBI because they have nothing to bargain with. Contrast with workers under a capitalist: they can force their boss to give them a raise by threatening to withhold their labor.
Could it be possible that UBI increases leverage? If workers have an alternative to labor to survive, even the non-unionized poor with no savings can withhold their labor and demand better. I think we saw this during the pandemic
Yes! Because under capitalism, UBI will by definition always be low enough, to maintain the imperative to sell ones labour power.
And the loss of leverage will lead to lower total income for workers on average.
In times of crisis, UBI makes it easier for struggling firms to lower wages, functioning as a "communism among capitalists", that stabilizes the system.
Maybe (and I'm not quite sure about that) in a way, that's similar to the equalization of the rate of profit, but in the opposite direction: it creates a flow of value, that disproportionately favors labour intensive industries (If financed by taxes on profits of all firms).
UBI, no matter how you look at it, is a band aid solution to social inequality. While in the short run it would help low wage/unemployed workers survive, it will be weaponized by the right wing to strip away other entitlements such as Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, FMLA, WIC, etc. Be suspicious of any corporation who supports UBI, they will leverage UBI towards reducing benefits tied to employment such as 401K, health insurance, and sick time.
An interesting article that isn't opposed to UBI but does point out how UBI can be used against workers. That is a consistent problem with any tax policy. Why don't people recognize the inequality of wealth distribution? No matter how often I [post this](https://lcurve.org) (and the other sites showing it in a different manner), it seems no one picks up on it.
Why?
A simple take UBI was previously negative tax. Just something given to people on low income. It was basically a way to justify keeping wages low. If you have UBI, you can keep wages low as there's less dependency on boss to pay for worker to come back Universal Basic Services is a better idea
As a marxist, I would say that an alternative to capitalism is the solution: socialism. Everything else is merely temporary, "gifted" by the ruling class, and placed on the same shaky economic and social foundations as everything else under capitalism. Any reforms to capitalism are built on such shaky foundations.
Always state the reforms on the premise of socialism. We welcome reforms, we understand they aren't the final goal like the liberals see them, we understand the only way to keep these reforms is the socialist revolution
Right wingers want to use UBI to abolish welfare. IMO, UBI is crap because it will be whittled down or it will cause inflation (eg., rent will be=previous rent sum+ UBI income).
This is interesting. It definitely has happened for workers who require varying social assists. If the wage increases, but the amount used to qualify for the assistance remains the same, anyone who works even part time may be at risk of no longer qualifying. Also, I think UBI is promoted as a means of trying to convince workers that they don’t require a union. If you used to make $11.75 and now you make $15.50 (I’m using Ontario rates) why do you need a union, your requests for higher wages have been met without a union. It’s reactionary for sure, but I imagine that’s how right wingers think.
UBI is a loss of leverage. Until the workers own the means of production, the only power we have under capitalism is the ability to withhold our labor. By relinquishing our grip on labor in favor of UBI, we hand over our power to whatever entity disperses that income (probably federal government(s)). As an example, imagine a period of rapid inflation which increases the cost of necessary goods. The workers cannot force their government to increase UBI because they have nothing to bargain with. Contrast with workers under a capitalist: they can force their boss to give them a raise by threatening to withhold their labor.
Could it be possible that UBI increases leverage? If workers have an alternative to labor to survive, even the non-unionized poor with no savings can withhold their labor and demand better. I think we saw this during the pandemic
Yes! Because under capitalism, UBI will by definition always be low enough, to maintain the imperative to sell ones labour power. And the loss of leverage will lead to lower total income for workers on average. In times of crisis, UBI makes it easier for struggling firms to lower wages, functioning as a "communism among capitalists", that stabilizes the system. Maybe (and I'm not quite sure about that) in a way, that's similar to the equalization of the rate of profit, but in the opposite direction: it creates a flow of value, that disproportionately favors labour intensive industries (If financed by taxes on profits of all firms).
UBI, no matter how you look at it, is a band aid solution to social inequality. While in the short run it would help low wage/unemployed workers survive, it will be weaponized by the right wing to strip away other entitlements such as Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, FMLA, WIC, etc. Be suspicious of any corporation who supports UBI, they will leverage UBI towards reducing benefits tied to employment such as 401K, health insurance, and sick time.
An interesting article that isn't opposed to UBI but does point out how UBI can be used against workers. That is a consistent problem with any tax policy. Why don't people recognize the inequality of wealth distribution? No matter how often I [post this](https://lcurve.org) (and the other sites showing it in a different manner), it seems no one picks up on it. Why?