We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Ellis Winningham
Economist. Blogger. Activist. Contributor at Real Progressives Cirizen Media.
Returning now to the UBI, we can understand with a little more thought about the concept, that it is not an automatic stabilizer. While it does increase aggregate demand, it is not a stabilizer, because it provides a guaranteed payment to everyone regardless of their income level. For a UBI to act as an automatic stabilizer, the amount provided would have to be progressive with the poorest receiving more than the richest. Because of the guarantee of equal payments regardless of the person’s income level and the inflationary potential of a standalone UBI, it is, in fact, the antithesis of an automatic stabilizer; it is an economic destabilizer. For these reasons and those mentioned in my article yesterday, I cannot support a standalone UBI as a solution for any economy.
AI Unverifiable
source
(2016)
2y ago
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Unverifiable
Source URL elliswinningham.net returns ECONNREFUSED (site appears offline). Web search returns strong indirect evidence: the exact phrase 'antithesis of an automatic stabilizer; it is an economic destabilizer' appears in Ellis Winningham's writing on UBI (he is a known MMT economist who wrote a series critical of standalone UBI). Vote 'against' on 'Implement a universal basic income' is consistent with Winningham's clearly stated position ('I cannot support a standalone UBI as a solution for any economy'). Year 2016 is older than 2025 but no more recent equivalent statement was located. Cannot directly fetch original page so marking ai_unverifiable.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 2h ago
replying to Ellis Winningham