If it were real UBI, these people could work those shitty jobs while still receiving the extra income every month. It's still a shitty job, but you also get the added benefit of not having to live in poverty while you do it.
EDIT: Also, this situation is further proof of how useful UBI would be to the economy. It would be the government helping businesses by subsidizing wages, making even crappy unsustainable jobs livable and attractive to workers.
Clear misunderstanding of incentives. Most people would chill or take easy fun jobs.
A nice vacation, nicer larger home, new car etc. UBI would just give people the cushion to take a risk and know if I fail I don't end up homeless. Or the piece of mind to relax and know they can eat a healthy meal and pay rent no need to work 2 or 3 jobs. Maybe the reinvest in their education.
No it isn't. My rent is up 80% since two years ago. Food costs are up 40%. Healthcare is up 200%. Good news though: fuel costs are about the same!
There's no major* rental market in the US where this is the case.
* - There could be some oil boom in a 300 person town I don't know about I guess.
Okay so 80% is an exaggeration. 30% isn't.
Is there a typo here? You have to sign a longer lease but you are paying the same per month... that's a 0% increase.
And as for month-to-month, paying zero premium for a month-to-month lease is abnormal in pretty much every market...
Signing a longer lease demonstrates that the new lease isn't like the old.
Otherwise let's compare apples and oranges in the economy too.
>> 30%
> same price per month, longer lease
So... zero percent inflation.
But this isn't even the most confusing part of this thread. The most confusing is your next comment in the context of your concern about inflation.
> Signing a longer lease demonstrates that the new lease isn't like the old.
Okay. But if you earnestly believed what you're saying about inflation then locking in 2019 prices for 15 months instead of 12 months would be a GOOD thing for you! You'd be locking in a fixed price for a longer duration during a period of high inflation. I've signed a three year residential lease in markets with high housing inflation and felt like I was getting away with murder (and I was under-paying by about 500/mo toward the end of that lease). If you expect inflation, then you want longer leases at fixed-in prices!!!
The price per month of your housing has increased ZERO percent, AND your landlord is betting AGAINST rent inflation in their market.
2. That's not reflective of the rental market in Houston (I'm from there and going back for a graduation tomorrow), that's reflective of your landlord charging you for the convenience of not moving.
https://www.rentcafe.com/apartments-for-rent/us/tx/houston/#...
WTH where do you live?
> Food costs are up 40%.
Dear god, what do you eat?
The top 1% are making more money than ever before. If you're holding assets impacted by inflation, you're doing quite well now.
If we take it as a given that in a modern, humane society no one should starve to death on the street and everyone should have access to the basics of survival, then the answer to the labor "shortage" is simply to shift some of the historically record breaking wealth inequality back down the org chart from the executives to the roles that need filling.
Also, there are not enough executives to take from them to give to the poor. You need 100 or 1000 times more for that, so the executives theme is a straw man.
* Basic groceries
* Healthcare
* Housing
I don't think these things are easy to achieve but they seem like obvious goals to societal progress. If not, what are we even progressing towards?
> Also, there are not enough executives to take from them to give to the poor. You need 100 or 1000 times more for that, so the executives theme is a straw man.
I said if a company wants to fill a role, that they should pull from executive pay. The average CEO gets 70-1 the pay of the average employee. There is absolutely a surplus of capital to pull from to increase worker pay (thus filling the role).