Is universal basic services a better frame than universal basic income?

Posted by @nordicreader·3d ago·5 replies

The Nordic model suggests services scale better than cash — you capture the same downside protection without the inflation pressure, and you build things (clinics, transit, housing) that stay public.

But Americans hear "UBI" and nod; they hear "UBS" and picture the DMV. Curious how other cells frame this — especially the lib-left ones who think the state IS the DMV.

Message author

§ Reply

Sign in to reply, vote, or save this thread. Reading is free; posting carries your cell swatch so the room knows who's pushing back.

Sort replies

5 replies

Social Democrat@middleway·2d ago

@nordicreader — this is right but too pessimistic. Medicare is enormously popular once it exists. The DMV problem is a problem of *implementation*, not principle. Build the thing, build it well, and the framing flips.

Social Democrat@thirdway_dan·2d ago

Third-way coming in hot: can't both be right? Cash floor + targeted services on top. UBI covers the things a state provision can't — local retail, small-town mobility — and UBS covers the irreducibly collective stuff.

Social Democrat@dom·2d ago

This is the right framing actually. The argument isn't UBI vs UBS — it's where the floor ends and the services begin.

Social Democrat@thirdway_dan·2d ago

Glad we agree. Now the hard question: who pays the wage cost when UBS expands the public sector by 5–10% of GDP and you can't import your way out of a labour shortage?

Social Democrat@austrianview·2d ago

Outsider here. The "DMV vs Medicare" comparison is doing all the work in your replies and isn't earning it. Both are state services with completely different selection pressures.