this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2023
1165 points (97.3% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2710 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PM_ME_YOUR_ZOD_RUNES@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I've always been a big proponent of UBI. But after speaking with my communist brother recently he opened my eyes to something. If UBI get's implemented, big corporations will just increase prices and completely/partially negate it.

What we need is a NEEDS income. We establish what are basic needs, housing, healthcare, food, etc.. and make sure that all of these needs are met.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's what they say about increasing minimum wage, and there's actually research proving it's not true in that case.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yep, his communist brother is full of shit. Corps aren't going to raise prices to negate it as it would just kill people's purchasing power who work. You'd effectively neuter your company pulling a stunt like that. What companies do see is a new area to pull money from.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's why instead of raising the price of a new game to $70, They just added more microtransactions. I mean they tried raising to 70 but people wouldn't have it, but microtransaction just gets the "aww shucks" treatment.

They call it the gig economy, but if they were being honest they would call this the nickel and dime economy.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And then it went to to 70 dollars anyway...

[–] bookmeat@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a reflection of big budgets for games growing over time. Customers demand more, costs go up.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's not the point.

The statement was that they wouldn't raise prices due to backlash, so to avoid raising prices they added micro transactions.

But then they raised prices as well

And there was some backlash

And now games are more expensive upfront and we also have micro transactions. And games still sell.

My point is, prices only go up, any backlash will be temporary, and if they do it slow enough they'll keep enough of their base it won't matter.

All the streaming services do the same thing.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Prices are driven by figuring out what the meeting point between the maximum someone will pay for a product or service, and how many people will pay for a product or service at a very low price.

If a company sells widgets at 100 dollars a piece, would they make more money if they were sold for 90 dollars a piece or 110 dollars a piece? They may move fewer at 110 dollars a piece but would the difference in price make up for it? It's hard to say, and a great deal of time and money is spent on figuring out what price will produce the greatest return on sales.

Imagine you're on a team trying to pinpoint this number and suddenly, over night, every single person in your market has 2000 extra dollars to spend. Great! A boon to sales is sure to come, and with it, because demand has increased, so to must cost, because the supply has not changed.

Now imagine you're a competitor, you also sell widgets but you've been selling them for 90 dollars all this time. All of a sudden, you can't keep shelves stocked. And you notice a competing widget selling for 110 dollars a piece!! It's essentially the same product, and you're moving them so fast, and people have 2000 extra dollars to spend, you bump the price up to match it. Because the supply has gone down, the prices must increase.

More spending means higher prices. Universally. You're living in an era with some of the worst inflation we've ever seen, and you have the audacity to suggest companies wouldn't raise their prices when people have more money to spend?

My brother in Zenu, they're raising prices when people have historically little to spend. Supplemental income for all Americans means money in our pockets that they believe belongs to them. You, the consumer are an obstacle between them and their money, and they'll bleed every cent they can out of you. UBI is painting a big sign on everyone's head that they have more money to spend, of course prices will go up to match.

[–] J12@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed. And start regulating and capping the prices of the needs like housing and healthcare

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The fact that there are still no caps on medicine costs in America baffles me. And I am an american, do you have any idea how much a single bag of saline cost to produce? I'm not even sure it's $5, but that won't stop them from charging you thousands on the bill when you leave the hospital.

[–] J12@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It’s absolutely insane what they charge. Another example is an MRI

I had an MRI done a few months back. I took probably max 30 minutes of the machine’s time. My bill was $5000. Fortunately insurance covered all but $200, but collectively it raises all of our insurance rates when a hospital charges $5000 for an hour test.

I did some math. A new MRI is 1 million to 3 million dollars. We’ll go on the upper end of 3 million.

Let’s say they do 8 MRIs a day.

They make $40,000 a day per MRI A 5 day work week they bring in $200,000/week $800,00/ month

That MRI is paid off in 4 months.

I get there’s other expenses. Rent is a few thousand a month. The techs probably made $20 a piece while I was there. There’s definitely maintenance on the machines. But come on? $5,000 for an MRI?

Let’s go a little deeper and see why the actual machines are so expensive. Are they actually that expensive or is GE, Siemens, Phillips making a huge markup?

I don’t hate capitalism like a lot on here, but I believe our needs health, education, housing, electricity needs to be highly regulated and it should not be for profit.

Also sorta unrelated but not really, but I love bringing up that Corporations should not own single family housing.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Capitalists should NEVER be put in charge of something essential for human survival

Canada's LPC recently issued grocery stores to price their goods fairly otherwise they are going to step in and regulate.

The same could be the same with other companies.

[–] bighatchester@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The government would also need to put restrictions on how much companies can charge for basic needs . Food , power , rent etc.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

But after speaking with my communist brother recently he opened my eyes to something.

I was certain this comment was satire at first, but now I'm not so sure.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm so glad people are starting to see this.

In 2008 there was a first time home buyer credit announced, and suddenly overnight every house on the market went up by about 10 grand.

The market is only a measure of how much wealth can be squeezed out of the working class, and the market always goes up. If UBI became a thing, suddenly everyone has another 2 grand to spend, and everyone will want their cut.

[–] bookmeat@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those prices were going to go up anyway. They've been doing so for years before and after that credit.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

They raise prices knowing we aren't making any more money, now imagine what they'll do when they know everyone has a lot of extra money to spend?