I suspect essays like this one will come to be viewed as leading indicators of the ultimate failure of Keynesian economics. Hopefully within a few decades, rather than a century.
The chief economic problem we face today, disempowering the middle class [0] and keeping them working full-bore, is the creation of rent. UBI seems like a solution because it proposes to alleviate some of this rent - but in an urban area (in-demand housing), housing rent [1] will just increase to eat up the UBI. This will further cement the divide between urban rat racers and rural poverty.
What we need is sound money - an end to this 45-year policy of forcing inflation. In a sane technological economy, the price of goods and services should trend decreasing - after all, price is the metric by which an economy optimizes. Technology has become so powerful that the decreases are still somewhat occurring for many things, leaving anything that can be financialized (and thus used to conjure new money) shooting through the roof to keep the average increasing.
If the middle class actually had a place to save [2], their marginal utility for each dollar would drop and they would gain negotiating power (liquid savings creates runway), letting them naturally demand higher compensation or lower working hours.
[0] The term is a bit overused, but for a good reason - sustainability. Only a few can ever be upper class, by definition. And the lower class does not see their own situation as desirable.
[1] Including both money directly paid to landlords, as well as rent payed to banks based on valuations only constrained by said rent.
[2] As opposed to be fleeced by the Wall St bubble casino over passive "investments".
The chief economic problem we face today, disempowering the middle class [0] and keeping them working full-bore, is the creation of rent. UBI seems like a solution because it proposes to alleviate some of this rent - but in an urban area (in-demand housing), housing rent [1] will just increase to eat up the UBI. This will further cement the divide between urban rat racers and rural poverty.
What we need is sound money - an end to this 45-year policy of forcing inflation. In a sane technological economy, the price of goods and services should trend decreasing - after all, price is the metric by which an economy optimizes. Technology has become so powerful that the decreases are still somewhat occurring for many things, leaving anything that can be financialized (and thus used to conjure new money) shooting through the roof to keep the average increasing.
If the middle class actually had a place to save [2], their marginal utility for each dollar would drop and they would gain negotiating power (liquid savings creates runway), letting them naturally demand higher compensation or lower working hours.
[0] The term is a bit overused, but for a good reason - sustainability. Only a few can ever be upper class, by definition. And the lower class does not see their own situation as desirable.
[1] Including both money directly paid to landlords, as well as rent payed to banks based on valuations only constrained by said rent.
[2] As opposed to be fleeced by the Wall St bubble casino over passive "investments".