> Do you sincerely believe that UBI is the difference between a working class individual and a billionaire?
Um, no? I don't know where I suggested that. All I said was that while UBI further enriches the producers of the world (who are overwhelmingly likely to be billionaires), it at least ensures that non-producers aren't at risk of dipping below some minimum standard of living.
> how would you expect a sudden surge of presumed new businesses to not be immediately gobbled up by the existing defacto monopolies in their respective sectors?
I wouldn't necessarily expect that — all that's being suggested is that it improves economic mobility because it allows a member of the working class to decide to take on the arts or entrepreneurship without worrying about starvation or going into credit card debt. That's the thesis behind any form of welfare, be it government-provided services or straight cash.
Also, most monopolies eventually reach obsolescence and die out or cease to be monopolies. It happened to DEC, IBM, Microsoft (which, hilariously avoided anti-trust scrutiny in 2020 through the genius move of not creating a business with dominant market share since Office). Not all monopolies engage in acquisitions — even non FAANG companies have M&A operations. Acquisitions can also be a good way for founders / early employees to realize wealth, which is especially beneficial in a UBI regime where entrepreneurial risk taking isn't life threatening. M&A and anti-trust has a lot of nuance. It's complicated.
Um, no? I don't know where I suggested that. All I said was that while UBI further enriches the producers of the world (who are overwhelmingly likely to be billionaires), it at least ensures that non-producers aren't at risk of dipping below some minimum standard of living.
> how would you expect a sudden surge of presumed new businesses to not be immediately gobbled up by the existing defacto monopolies in their respective sectors?
I wouldn't necessarily expect that — all that's being suggested is that it improves economic mobility because it allows a member of the working class to decide to take on the arts or entrepreneurship without worrying about starvation or going into credit card debt. That's the thesis behind any form of welfare, be it government-provided services or straight cash.
Also, most monopolies eventually reach obsolescence and die out or cease to be monopolies. It happened to DEC, IBM, Microsoft (which, hilariously avoided anti-trust scrutiny in 2020 through the genius move of not creating a business with dominant market share since Office). Not all monopolies engage in acquisitions — even non FAANG companies have M&A operations. Acquisitions can also be a good way for founders / early employees to realize wealth, which is especially beneficial in a UBI regime where entrepreneurial risk taking isn't life threatening. M&A and anti-trust has a lot of nuance. It's complicated.