Poverty is a policy choice.
Homelessness is to capitalism in the same way liberals think gulags are to communism: to punish and make an example out of those who refuse to accept the ideology.
‘Refuse’ makes it seem like a choice. ‘Are unacceptable to the ideology’ is fairer imo.
It’s not really cheaper for those who matter (the bourgeoisie).
The reason being it’s a labor discipline tool. If no one is at risk of poverty you get more uppity workers who unionize and/or demand more pay, more benefits, etc which ends up costing the ruling class more at the end of that spiral. That’s what studies like this don’t take into account, the actual utility of poverty, homelessness, etc to the ruling class in aiding their theft of worker value.
The poor traditionally are kept around in some amount as a reserve labor force as well. To be called in to strike break or to pull into the lowest rungs of the most exploited industries to replace those who are uppity and most likely to be uppity due to being most exploited. Their existence allows poor pay and conditions in the worst industries which allows higher profit margins. They also serve as a way of funneling government money into private pockets (if the poor were killed off then there goes the money the grocers, the food companies, the farmers, etc get via them redeeming food stamps and so on) with a veneer of social charity.
Cheaper for government isn’t the point that drives policy. It would also be cheaper for government to not pour hundreds of billions into weapons and wars but that serves a function of moving money into the pockets of arms-maker corporations and the ruling capitalist class as well.
I don’t buy this. You wrote, “It’s not really cheaper for those who matter (the bourgeoisie).” and then “Cheaper for government isn’t the point that drives policy.” Yes, it is! Because the government is the government of the bourgeoisie. It is the ruling assembly for their capitalist economy. Ultimately, it is the working class who funds the government because it is the class which does all work. So, you could pretend that costs do not matter for the capitalists. But the working class can only pay in taxes what they got in wages. This means higher costs for government lower the profits of capitalists. (And we know that capitalists want to slash government spending wherever possible.) And that is why it is a cost to everybody in society when politicians decide to punish the poor for what is not their fault, when, for example, they maintain a homeless population at great costs while it is cheaper to house them in existing empty housing. This hurts the homeless the most, at the expense of everyone.
So that’s what trump is doing. Ending poverty by cutting off their food & healthcare & housing. End poverty by ending the lives of impoverished people.
Capitalists say fuck you
These studies have been coming out for at least two decades, maybe more. But you know, false scarcity enriched a few, so there’s that.
The people paying for it don’t know that there is any other way than struggling to pay for it. The cheaper part comes from taxing the rich to get the wealth to take care of people, to fulfill basic human rights for all.
Cheaper? Yes. More profitable? No.
We wouldn’t be easy to exploit so it’ll never happen.
UBI ends poverty and saves money. Just like “basic exemptions” parts of tax code are not government outlays, and simply mean that other tax rates are higher to not collect revenue from your first $12k or $25k in income. Similarly UBI is just tax credits/debits flowing from some to others. It is not governnment discretion. It doesn’t even have to be considered part of their budget, and with right tax code just a function of GDP and population.
UBI saves money because budgets for welfare, police/justice, and even use of healthcare services are reduced when poverty eliminated. Hatred and division is helpful to political class, but obviously disruptive/destructive to any social progress. Our new American History X politics were always jealousy about “special privileges for race-dominated poorer classes”.
Poverty is relative. You can be a poor millionaire if bread costs $10,000 a loaf. You’d have to perpetually monitor it and prices.
