Those seem incompatible to me.

(UBI means Universal Basic Income, giving everyone a basic income, for free)

  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    who will also continue to make profit on the labor the lower class does to afford anything above basic necessities

    If someone can afford basic necessities, they aren’t going to choose to work three jobs at minimum wage where they are treated badly, forcing an improvement in pay/conditions to find any workers. As for setting prices arbitrarily, that isn’t actually possible except where a monopoly is held, the idea that supply and demand influences price is not a myth. Having money and the choice of how to spend it does actually give you additional agency and leverage, and UBI would serve as a form of redistribution if it is funded by taxes of some kind.

    • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Except that landlords are coming together to set prices so that they can all set them high. I don’t remember what the group is called, but someone was discussing it a while back. Doesn’t have to be a monopoly if they’re conspiring, which is what is happening with so many consumer goods and services.

      • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        Cartel is the word you are probably looking for. Cartels are when an association of different suppliers collude to restrict competition and keep prices high.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          it’s only really a cartel if they get together and make these plans, in reality none of these landlords are stupid, they will just adjust their demands to the upper region of what people feel acceptable, this slowly moves the “acceptability window” up, all without anyone needing to conspire with anyone else

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Right, so this is market pricing at work. In order to fix this problem, we need to relax the suppression of new construction.

            Even if we don’t, however, if rents increase it will increase construction of new housing.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’ve seen that stuff but it’s too much to assume that this kind of coordination is the controlling factor in housing prices, or most other prices. You do need a monopoly because there’s too much incentive for defecting from the conspiracy if the fixed price is too far away from what the market price would be. I think housing is expensive mainly because of supply being suppressed and wealth inequality, and UBI would begin to address the latter.

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            the use of this software prevented landlords from courting would-be renters through the use of different discounts, said the lawsuit. For instance, landlords sometimes offer move-in deals or compete on prices but the use of Yardi’s algorithmic pricing tool disrupted that practice, claimed the attorneys …

            Overall, the rate of rent growth has fallen back toward historical norms after nearly two years of historically high growth.

            Like I mentioned in another comment, I can see how this kind of thing could make some difference in pricing by avoiding giving renters deals that wouldn’t have actually been necessary to secure a lease. That’s very far from being evidence that supply and demand doesn’t even apply and the market price is dictated by fiat, which is an absurd conspiracy theory that doesn’t follow at all from any of the articles being linked.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah there are like a handful of companies that control egg distribution. That’s the kind of scenario where a price fixing cartel can work.

        • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          How do you explain cereal being $8 a box, when it was $5 pre-COVID or the million other products that now cost more? There are recordings of board meetings that were leaked of board members admitting that they inflated prices or unnecessarily kept prices inflated because they knew people would pay it.

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Why could that not have an explanation that is primarily about economic forces? They printed a ton of money around when Covid happened, and the distribution of wealth shifted significantly. I can buy that businesses could be eking out a little more efficiency by coordinating, but not that we are in a secret command economy and economics is basically all fake.

            • orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              the “printing of money” has fuck all to do with inflation, and mainly comes from pop-economics that is stuck somewhere around mercantilism.

              Corporation simply realized that they are playing the prisoner’s dilemma with prices, and are now going for the “optimal solution”

              • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                How do you figure you can increase the number of dollars in circulation, while shrinking the economy, and not have each dollar be worth less wealth as a result?

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            How do you explain cereal being $8 a box, when it was $5 pre-COVID …

            Two things:

            1. We shut down the economy, and supply got disrupted because the economy isn’t a thing you can just turn off for a period of time and have it come back on again

            2. We shut down the economy in non-equal fashion leading to some stores being forced to close while others were allowed to remain open. This led to reduced competition among those supplying the cereal. Competition works to reduce prices, and we killed the competition. The covid lockdowns were a government-enforced consolidation of the market. There are fewer players, each of which owns a larger share now.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Landlords are coming together to set prices so that they can all set them high.

        This is a conspiracy theory, theorizing a conspiracy of enormous proportions. If there is price fixing going on, it is in any given player’s best interest to break rank and offer lower prices.

    • Sekrayray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      You can set the prices if they are well known at a federal level—look at the number of disparate vendors who charged exactly the price of a stimulus check for goods when they were being given in 2020.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What goods were those? I am guessing the market price of those goods was already relatively close to that number. You can see a pattern like that sometimes with stock or crypto prices; when it passes across a nice round number, or a number with some significance like the price of another related stock, the price may seem to exist in relation to that number, sticking to or avoiding it. But crucially this is only as long as it is in the vicinity; there are other factors that have more influence over price and after the blip around the round number, the line moves on.

        The core mistake here I think is not recognizing that wealth is a form of power. Controlling a greater share of society’s wealth means more control in general, which is why companies are trying to do that to begin with. Redistributing wealth is anything but an empty gesture.

        • Sekrayray@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Mostly tech items like TV’s, but I saw it with some furniture, too.

          I just worry that UBI won’t do enough to redistribute wealth without concomitant systematic change. I honestly think those in economic power probably need a good degree of is stripped away for society to really move on and heal from rampant, unchecked capitalism.

    • buzz86us@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Not so simple honestly it would also be funded by a reduction in bureaucracy, and spending on poverty alleviation. I’m in NY there are 50 something counties here each with their own DSS office. Think of the reductions in demand for some of these dumb programs that essentially kick the worker while their down.