but I’ve never seen a convincing argument that “inflation” (read “greedy bastards”) wouldn’t immediately wipe out the extra income
i have one for you
in 1960s people were well off (one house, two cars, three kids, based on a single income). why didn’t “inflation” wipe out the surplus income immediately?
i have one for you
in 1960s people were well off (one house, two cars, three kids, based on a single income). why didn’t “inflation” wipe out the surplus income immediately?
Back then there wasn’t just three rich tech bro losers that owned the means of all the labor.
Okay, why wouldn’t UBI effectively get wiped out by inflation over 65 years, as has apparently happened to the prosperity in the '60s, then?