Universal Basic Income feedback

Democracy 4
1

I don’t normally implement this policy, but I was at the point where I was winning infinite elections had paid off all national debt, and had 50 PC to work with. So I decided to give it a go.

I find it odd that this policy directly lifts wages. Wages are the money people get paid for going to work, and this policy doesn’t discriminate by employment status. If anything, I would expect that if it ever were implemented on a national scale in a western country, it would probably be done in a “means tested” way to keep costs down, and people with “too much” income wouldn’t receive it. It certainly should increase some people’s earnings, but not through wages.

It does increase “everyone’s” earnings, which technically yes, as I understand it this would be an even payment to everybody. However, the impact that an equal amount of money would have on somebody’s earnings would inversely scale with their existing earnings. Say, if we work in pounds for example, if the UBI were 1000 pounds a month, somebody who is borrowing to pay the rent will notice that far more than a pharmaceutical CEO. Rather than “everyone” earnings, it should impact poor earnings the most, middle earnings a little, and have no impact on high earnings.

It also doesn’t impact unemployment. It really should. Now, in real world terms it wouldn’t increase the unemployment rate, it would decrease the labor force participation rate. However, that stat is not represented in game, so an unemployment increase is the closest representation modeled. I’m sure most of us have met some of the people I’m referring to. People who have no special condition that requires extra care or anything, they just don’t like working. Given a choice, such people would absolutely crutch on a UBI rather than get a job. Unemployment benefit already raises unemployment, UBI should too. I’m not saying it needs to be a lot, but some should be present.

I don’t think a direct like to charity is needed, as it already decreases poverty, which will decrease charity.

The impact on socialist and capitalist opinions are fine, the impact on poverty is fine, the impact on socialism should have more lag time.

2 Likes
2

So, a few things:

I find it odd that this policy directly lifts wages. Wages are the money people get paid for going to work"

Swap “income” for “wages” and it makes sense, functionally, in the game. Not a big deal.

this policy doesn’t discriminate by employment status. If anything, I would expect that if it ever were implemented on a national scale in a western country, it would probably be done in a “means tested” way to keep costs down, and people with “too much” income wouldn’t receive it.

I think you’re missing the point of “Universal.”

It also doesn’t impact unemployment. It really should. Now, in real world terms it wouldn’t increase the unemployment rate, it would decrease the labor force participation rate. However, that stat is not represented in game, so an unemployment increase is the closest representation modeled. I’m sure most of us have met some of the people I’m referring to. People who have no special condition that requires extra care or anything, they just don’t like working. Given a choice, such people would absolutely crutch on a UBI rather than get a job. Unemployment benefit already raises unemployment, UBI should too. I’m not saying it needs to be a lot, but some should be present.

So this is mixing a couple of concepts up. First, even in the game, unemployment doesn’t count people not looking for work. So if it was enough to keep people from wanting to work, it wouldn’t actually swell the unemployment rolls.

Second, UBI is almost never enough to live on. There’s another argument that UBI could help employment, because people could afford to work a lower-wage job. For example, someone might need $70K to live comfortably in a major city, but if UBI coves, say, $24K of that, now they can get by on just $46K in wages.

This video is super interesting, talking about the dynamics between minimum wages and UBI. I Highly suggest it! (15) Here’s Why Supply and Demand is Overrated! - YouTube

I do think that the economic impact of UBI is understated in the game. If every person got a check of that size every month, we’d be talking about some major increases in buying power! It should be able to function much like stimulus funding.

4 Likes
3

Some fantastic points.

I should think it’s because wages decrease productivity, and the devs wanted this policy to bite you back, so as to disprove it’s value within the mad modelling of the game. It would’ve been accurate for it to change poor and middle-earnings, but then it would be less of a net-negative policy.

Certainly there are plenty of people like this. Much as many of us wouldn’t much like to slave over the pyramids or till the fields, people of every age learn and struggle against new thresholds of what they see as dignified work. I posted about these hypothetically financial sound, educated unemployed recently

Unfortunately, domestic spending isn’t really modelled explicitly in the game. The poor earnings simulation’s only function to my knowledge is to deter the general strike. The closest value is Tourism.
I’d imagine trying to rebalance the game so that each income group’s earnings reflect the economy would require an unrealistic overhaul at this point.
Perhaps a green bubble for “high financial velocity” for societies with citizens that all have healthy disposable incomes would do the trick?

2 Likes
4

Thanks for the discussion folks.

Even in game, earnings and wages are different things, with wages being clearly linked to employment in a few ways, so I don’t think I’m nit picking by pointing out the flaw. This modelling is saying that employers pay their employees more money directly because UBI exists.

I’m not missing the point of universal at. Call me cynical, but I’m saying that this is what any real world government would actually do with a "universal"policy.

I’m not mixing the concepts up, but trying to use the tools within this simulation to model something. I get why the simulation is simplified, it needs to create a playable game. So, if the correct output of a policy were to lower the labor force participation rate, what would be the best way to model that in this game?

With regard to the economic impact of spending power, it is odd that helicopter money produces a GDP boost, but UBI does not. Both are a cash hand out to those at the bottom of the economic ladder, with one creating new money at the cost of inflation while the other pays it out of the national budget.

I see what you’re saying about having this economically bite back. However, if anything this should increase productivity, as the people choosing not to work likely have minimalist attitudes, making them poor workers anyways.

I have also found the lack of a link between spending power and economics odd. If the economy is built on people spending money, than surely people having more money to spend would be a good thing for it. The fact that my policies somehow change the economic demographics from having upwards of 50% poor to having upwards of 90% middle income seems to go largely unrewarded.

Thanks again guys for participation in this discussion. I was concerned that I might have kicked enough of a hornet’s nest of opinions that noone would touch it.

2 Likes
5

The whole point of Universal Basic Income is that it’s Universal. It cannot be a social symbol to receive it, as everyone gets it. The only people who could be excluded are illegal immigrants and possibly current (not former) prisoners.

To take the universal out of Universal Basic income is to implement an entirely different policy - Basic Income (which is basically give money to poor people and only poor people). Yes, Basic Income and Universal Basic Income are two separate policies that exist for two separate reasons.

2 Likes