Why the world should adopt a basic income

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by LafayetteBis, Jul 10, 2018.

  1. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what is the "economic" definition of coercion?
     
  2. Anikdote

    Anikdote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,844
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    So I guess this is where you play dumb and pretend that it hasn't been posted and ignored multiple times. I'm not your errand boy, you'll need to sort this one on your own.
     
    Reiver likes this.
  3. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ah, you're right. You're absolutely right. We can't conduct experiments in economics in which we hold all other variables constant.
     
  4. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ooh, a super secret economic definition of coercion. Color me intrigued.
     
  5. Anikdote

    Anikdote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,844
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    There's a few rare natural experiments, but they're few and far between. (The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment is a good example).

    Importantly though, you admitting an inability to hold things constant just completely unravels any notions of zero sum. It's just not possible to hold those two views simultaneously unless you're satisfied with the contradiction.

    So bloody secret it's been linked in this thread, used in thousands of peer reviewed journal articles and is standard terminology everywhere. I guess actually reading what others post is, a bridge to far.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2018
  6. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have not proposed the notion of 'zero sum'. You have.
     
  7. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again, you are deliberately trying to make this personal. This of course reflects how you cannot counter what has been said: it is hypocritical to refer to violence when supply and demand informs us that the right wing demands for neoliberalism (and that's all they are) are coercive. They demand the destruction of mutually beneficial exchange opportunity.
     
  8. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Coercive? How so?
     
  9. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Already said, multiple times. The deliberate destruction of mutually beneficial exchange opportunity is, by definition, coercion.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2018
  10. James Knapp

    James Knapp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2018
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    699
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Can we all agree that a basic income would lead to inflation and therefore devalue the money that you have, virtually deeming it a pointless exercise. That's not to mention the unholy amount of under-productive people it would lead to producing.

    I am in favour of subsidies on housing for the poor and free healthcare (I'm British) but there has to be an element of needing to produce and give, to receive.
     
  11. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree. The government ought not deliberately destroy mutually beneficial exchange opportunities by initiating violence against innocent people.
     
  12. Anikdote

    Anikdote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,844
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Why lie? Like I can't go retrieve the post...

    See, above, a direct reference to 'zero sum' - You won't be able to do the same for me.

    Not really clear why you've opted for dishonesty at this point.
     
    Reiver likes this.
  13. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Zero sum? I don't believe I said zero sum. You did.
     
  14. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, rather than continuing your personal attacks, you've decided to deliberately misrepresent. That's a shame.

    Back to reality. How can a demand which deliberately destroys exchange opportunity be deemed libertarian?
     
  15. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't know what you mean by 'a demand which deliberately destroys exchange', so I can't answer your question.
     
  16. Anikdote

    Anikdote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,844
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Nope, we cannot. For one, we aren't talking about printing new dollars. Since the amount in circulation remains constant, there's no reason to expect inflation. Perhaps a small jump immediately following the legislation in the price of homogeneous consumer goods followed by a leveling off, as has been shown in MW research.

    Unlike welfare benefits, a UBI is paid out whether you work or not, so I don't expect there to be a large disincentive effect. Importantly, people who would otherwise be destitute would be able to continue contributing to the economy. This is good for everyone.

    No body knows how to best spend a dollar on yourself, but you. In kind, monetary benefits are the most effective.
     
  17. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes you do, I've gone through it repeatedly. Happy to summarise if it helps...

    Supply and demand informs us that firms have wage making power. That means a minimum wage will reduce equilibrium unemployment, correcting for how monopsonistic power ensures that mutually beneficial exchange is not exhausted.

    I'll ask again. Can a demand that harms exchange be considered libertarian?
     
  18. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Demand (the desire and ability to purchase a good) can't harm exchange.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2018
  19. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A nonsense reply. Let's try again. Right wingers demand that minimum wages are removed. We know that will harm exchange.

    Given removal of minimum wages will harm exchange, is it consistent with libertarian ideology?
     
  20. Anikdote

    Anikdote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,844
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    So, if you describe an animal with feathers that walks on two legs and quacks, should I not call it a duck?
     
    Reiver likes this.
  21. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Removal of minimum wages will not harm exchange.
     
  22. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have already proven that it will. Supply and demand predicts the destruction; empirical evidence confirms it.

    Given removal of minimum wages will harm exchange, is it consistent with libertarian ideology?
     
  23. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm sorry but you haven't proven that removal of minimum wages will harm exchange.
     
  24. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless you reject supply and demand, your understanding of the labour market will predict it. The empirical evidence cannot be challenged. Both of the latest meta-analysis reviews conclude positive employment effects.

    You keep dodging. Is a demand that will harm exchange consistent with libertarian ideology?
     
  25. TedintheShed

    TedintheShed Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,301
    Likes Received:
    1,983
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He doesn't understand the flaw in his premise: in a relatively free market, wages are determined by the market and as a result firms do not have monospony power.

    The only way a firm can have monospony power is if the state restricts the market in a way to provide it.
     
    Longshot likes this.

Share This Page