Exactly. The key to making people happier is not to give them money, but create more jobs that give people meaning and purpose in their lives.
What does HN think about that?
The narrative is that people who live paycheck to paycheck are forced into undesirable jobs because they are under time pressure to make money and can't be choosy. UBI will reduce the time pressure and make them be able to be a bit more choosy in what kind of job they get. UBI will also allow them time to invest in themselves to be able to land higher skilled jobs.
It will also allow people to more willingly enter low pay, higher calling jobs (teachers, etc) if they enjoy it because it has been bumped up from "too little" to "just enough" with UBI.
Over time I would imagine that due to inflation and the increased cashflow that everyone will have the prices of basic necessities will increase to the point that UBI just covers them, or worse that simply living will require UBI + a job?
I don't mean that in a snarky tone, it's something I'm trying to wrap my head around as far as UBI discussion goes.
Money is created by central banks, circulated by the government (including with 'entitlement programs' like UBI would count as, but also through things like spending billions on fancy jet fighters) and other banks (and there multiplied by fractional reserve banking).
It's then 'destroyed' by taxes and encouraging people to buy into government bonds and other things that slow down the flow of money.
These are all policy instruments that control how much money is flowing through the economy, and inflation is a product of that flow.
So the answer is, because they would raise taxes on it. A large portion of the money given out would just go straight into taxes from high income earners also getting UBI.
But also they could do things like lower the reserve ratio banks are required to hold to reduce the flow of money into the economy, instead choosing to create money through people instead of banks.
I'm curious what the other 95% are going to do.
They'd probably do it regardless of UBI, but without UBI they do it and are slightly more angry or frustrated at their own situation.
Real inflation does not require an expansion in money supply because inflation is not flat across all areas of the economy.
You can see the same effect when luxury housing goes up in a town. Rents go down for everyone.
The question is why the people who do work at a potentially unsatisfying job to earn money should be forced to support the people who don't want to do anything in their life that anybody else values enough to willingly pay them for.
The United States already supports millions of citizens via a backdoor welfare: disability. This simply takes away the corruption and bureaucracy and gives it to everyone.
So to those who need it, and also those who don't. Why not just the first group? It'd be a lot cheaper.
If a person has money, helping him is a job.
UBI creates jobs by "un-freezing" demand that was previously frozen out of the system due to poverty.
Hobbies and unpaid creative pursuits are more likely to bring meaning than employment in my opinion.