Right. If we just increased the bottom earners incomes by 20k, home prices would probably go up a similar amount. Housing problems require housing solutions. The appeal of UBI and SS is that it'll keep people out of poverty and less vulnerable to housing problems but its not a substitute for housing.
Not that these policies would be opposed by most of the readers here, but that and a lot more low cost options for social housing (that were eliminated over the years as “unsightly” but no alternatives replaced them).
It’s a bit of a wonky perspective, but without that, you might get housing inflation that crowds out benefit to this specific target group that UBI would ideally help. Shortages in goods where it is hard to bring more supply online, or it takes a long time (... like housing) will generate inflation with more spending rather than real goods.
That’s not an argument, obviously, to not build housing--building it actually the optimal solution--though it’s more a “yes, and” thing here where having an optimal outcome to our challenges today take a lot of coordinated policies together.
"Our economy didn’t collapse — we saw boosted economic stimulus and greater disposable income"
That's largely because we took on an unsustainable increase in debt, which rose by about 25% of GDP. If we could do that every couple of years it would be easy to fund every social problem. But with debt-to-GDP at 100%, interest rates on the deficit rising and baby boomers retirements picking up steam it's getting more and more difficult to fund social programs with borrowing. Eventually we just won't be able to.
We could fund more social services and reduce the deficit through tax increases, but I suspect conservative ( and liberal ) resistance to those tax increases is a better explanation for opposition to welfare spending than is people feeling better about themselves if they see others suffer.
Right. If we just increased the bottom earners incomes by 20k, home prices would probably go up a similar amount. Housing problems require housing solutions. The appeal of UBI and SS is that it'll keep people out of poverty and less vulnerable to housing problems but its not a substitute for housing.
Not that these policies would be opposed by most of the readers here, but that and a lot more low cost options for social housing (that were eliminated over the years as “unsightly” but no alternatives replaced them).
It’s a bit of a wonky perspective, but without that, you might get housing inflation that crowds out benefit to this specific target group that UBI would ideally help. Shortages in goods where it is hard to bring more supply online, or it takes a long time (... like housing) will generate inflation with more spending rather than real goods.
That’s not an argument, obviously, to not build housing--building it actually the optimal solution--though it’s more a “yes, and” thing here where having an optimal outcome to our challenges today take a lot of coordinated policies together.
"Our economy didn’t collapse — we saw boosted economic stimulus and greater disposable income"
That's largely because we took on an unsustainable increase in debt, which rose by about 25% of GDP. If we could do that every couple of years it would be easy to fund every social problem. But with debt-to-GDP at 100%, interest rates on the deficit rising and baby boomers retirements picking up steam it's getting more and more difficult to fund social programs with borrowing. Eventually we just won't be able to.
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2023/10/6/when-does-federal-debt-reach-unsustainable-levels
We could fund more social services and reduce the deficit through tax increases, but I suspect conservative ( and liberal ) resistance to those tax increases is a better explanation for opposition to welfare spending than is people feeling better about themselves if they see others suffer.