Shouldn't the goal be to provide universal services first?(i.e. transportation, education, healthcare, and housing). I would like universal income but my fear is that companies could just raise prices.
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
32 points (97.1% liked)
Solarpunk
5463 readers
48 users here now
The space to discuss Solarpunk itself and Solarpunk related stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.
Join our chat: Movim or XMPP client.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Idk the discussions I have read about are basicly UBI to replace unemployment benefits, while not cutting stuff like public transport, healthcare, education and housing. The big advantage is basicly that unemployment forces you into work as soon as possible, whereas UBI allows for experiments, including the option of building something up yourself and it takes away a lot from the power hierachy in businesses. If you can just leave your job freely and be fine, then it is much more of an option. A lot of unemployment benefits do not work, if you just quit your job.
It could be basically the same thing but those services would be provided by private companies. Which wouldn't be too bad if they were highly regulated, specially in margins and prices. If the income value was regulated and coming from companies by form of taxes anyway and it made sure that if someone needed something but was over that value wouldn't go without. But I don't know why I'm defending it, I agree with you, UBI just feels like a way of just avoiding public services, which is foolish but will probably be needed the way the world is headed. Mostly because providing these services in most places is harder that just giving the money.
If services can be measured in money (budgets) then direct payment is equivalent to services, say the robber baron overlords.
On the one hand, it seems more practical, but on the other hand, infrastructure takes FOREVER to put in place and my lifeblood is gushing out of my wallet in the current time.
That's one thing I don't understand. Infrastructure is always too expensive and takes too long but around where I leave some companies just put up 3 building in about a year an half and sold every single unit. I have my doubts about the quality of the apartments but still, they are there. In the mean time not a single public student residence was built or even started (I live near the university).
It's one thing to build a building on land that you own. Universities do commonly build new residences, academic buildings, stadiums, etc. Why it didn't happen in your town idk.
Public transit projects take forever because:
- They don't own all the land. They have to figure out who to buy it from and that is complicated.
- Safety. You need to know that the system you build will be safe, and when you have heavy vehicles moving at high speed, that means lots of engineering time.
- Regulations and procedures - there are prescribed processes that public projects need to follow for bidding, selection, design reviews, etc. These exist to ensure safety, prevent corruption, and things like this. But they take a long time.
- Politics. You can't just pick the technical best option and do it. You also have to sell it to all the local voters, and get legislative approval for the budget. And no matter what you choose, people will constantly be talking about how it's a terrible idea and too expensive, etc.
And probably a lot of other reasons I can't think of right now.
There is one thing that I know it's an issue. Most of the work normally is done by companies that apply for contracts with the government this process by itself takes some time. But there's the issue of companies avoiding these contracts because the state tends to take too long to pay which makes the project seems less appealing, but then there's the other side where the contractualized company just never prioritizes the project. In my town I think there is a vested interest off too many people in real estate, but I admit that is a bit of a conspiracy theory I have.