As opposed to all the regular kinds of shitty behaviour landlords inflict on their tenants already? I feel like "because the money people will continue to misbehave" is absolutely not a reason to avoid doing something.
UBI is unique. When I get a raise at work, my landlord doesn’t know. If you implement UBI, every landlord knows that every tenant in the whole country has $xxxx more per month to pay.
Literally 100% of them will raise the rent and there won’t be anything anyone can do about it.
I don't think it is this simple. Even with UBI, there will be varying quality of rentals, with nicer ones being more expensive. If every landlord jacked up the price, demand would shift to cheaper, lower quality rentals. More people will get roommates etc, reducing demand entirely.
In addition, every seller of a good/service could do the same. They can't all increase prices to extract the full $xxxx a month. There are much more complex dynamics at play then just "landlords will raise rent enough to extract the full UBI benefit."
This is only true in places where there are more people trying to rent than places.
In theory, having more capital available in the face of a landlord raising rent an obnoxious amount will incentivize people who aren't making much to move somewhere with a lower CoL that they might not have been able to make work otherwise because of uncertainty in the amount of time they'd be out of work or their base level of money available for that time.
This is only a problem when you have very limited housing supply, so you need to combine it with things like better housing/zoning policies and rent control.
FWIW, some of us still do this in C programs today. Having a relatively unique prefix for struct members makes it extremely easy to find uses of those members with relatively simple tools like cscope.
I think basically everyone with ADHD discovers this eventually; e.g.,
> Sympathetic Procrastination Rotor: a technique for Time and Task Management.
> To aid in the fight against procrastination, arrange all of your tasks in a cycle, such that the natural opportunity for procrastination is always another task on the roadmap. In this essay I will
DNS & DHCP are generally short lived transactions that are very easy to restart and retry, so as long as it restarts very quickly that seems like a reasonable trade off in implementation complexity to be honest.
How is firing a bunch of people because you made a machine that you believe can do their jobs not textbook corporate greed? It seems like the worst impulses of Taylorism made manifest?
This is worse: this is just pretending like the machine does their jobs because it benefits them.
The big (biggest? ) problem of modernity is that quality is decorrelated from profit. There's a lot more money in having the optics of doing a good job than in actually doing it; the economy is so abstracted and distributed that the mechanism of competition to punish bad behavior, shitty customer service, low standards, crappy work, fraud... is very weak. There is too much information asymmetry, and the timescale of information propagation is too long to have much of an effect. As long as no one notices what you're fucking up very quickly you can get away with it for a long time.
Seems even worse to me. At least in the 'competition' paradigm there's a mechanism for things getting better for consumers. No such thing here.
Certainly if they're like us, and travelling to new worlds, they'll be imperialistic and colonial. They'll plant a flag, because we obviously weren't really making use of the planet, not _really_, and attempt to civilise the natives through something between cultural erasure and genocide.
On Earth, in the grand scheme of things, it took a very short time for colonies to a) diverge politically or b) fail. It's not something that stopped happening (much) because we became more cuddly. It's just boring old economics.
So I think it's unfeasible to maintain a society that rules with an iron fist over interstellar distance and time.
reply