Friedberg argues happiness requires relative progress not absolute income, so UBI will inevitably cause societal decay.
“So the notion of some sort of flatlined or even flatlined at inflation adjusted basic income level for a large number of people will inevitably result in kind of what we're trying to prevent, which is, you know, some sort of decay, societal decay.”
Friedberg argues that change in income predicts happiness, which drives government spending through voter demand.
“Your change in income is your predictor of happiness. So if we start with that premise of like human behavior, the government now has an incredible the federal government in The United States has an incredible role in supporting a lot of people through active programs that pump money into businesses.”
Friedberg argues happiness depends on income change rather than absolute income level above basic needs.
“So if we start with that premise of like human behavior, the government now has an incredible the federal government in The United States has an incredible role in supporting a lot of people”
Friedberg cites research showing happiness plateaus at $60k income but correlates with year-over-year income change above that level.
“at the time, it improved up to $60,000 of income a year Right. Then it flatlined beyond And then the the the key measure of happiness was income change year over year.”
Friedberg explains happiness research showing year-over-year income change matters more than absolute wealth for human satisfaction.
“the key measure of happiness was income change year over year. The more your income changes from one year to the next, the happier you are.”