Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Video & Multimedia

DBoon

(24,745 posts)

4. You are right, basic income is a massive transfer from capital to labor

Reply to wasupaloopa (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 15, 2017, 11:55 AM

Oct 2017

specifically including the underemployed and unemployed who are so essential to keeping wages down and profits up

The owners of capital are the beneficiaries of automation, automation is the replacement of live workers with capital good.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Universal Basic Income vs Negative Income Tax [View all] LongTomH Oct 2017 OP

I don't understand the reasoning behind it. wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #1

I'll let someone with more of an understanding of basic economics reply. LongTomH Oct 2017 #2

The other basic economic theory is wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #3

You are right, basic income is a massive transfer from capital to labor DBoon Oct 2017 #4

The problem is only the producers are contributing. wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #5

Wrong. yallerdawg Oct 2017 #7

I am not wrong, you just leave out the inconvenient factors. wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #9

The capitalists are pocketing labor cost savings and more efficient productivity increase as profit. yallerdawg Oct 2017 #10

Here is the thing. Unskilled labor and many skilled jobs are gone never wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #12

It's coming. yallerdawg Oct 2017 #14

Yes. It is a fundamental way to reduce the society-busting levels of income & wealth inequalty. Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2017 #16

Wrong. Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2017 #15

You're confused about basic economic theory. Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2017 #13

Your steps go off the rails with "cost of living X + $5000". That violates the definition. Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2017 #11

You are putting money into circulation that wasn't there. You are creating more demand. wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #17

You're still not clear. If you want to argue from your initial set of steps you have to clarify them Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2017 #18

It seems to me that you start with the premise that everyone deserves a certain, basic Stonepounder Oct 2017 #6

They will not produce if you are going to take it away. wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #8

You do realize that during the Eisenhower years, the top marginal tax bracket was 92% Stonepounder Oct 2017 #19

Basic economic theories based on capitalism fail when you no longer need human workers. tclambert Oct 2017 #20