Economy Joe Rogan not so hot on UBI anymore after buddy's restaurant venture struggles

[jeremyemilio]

Kind of a weird take. He used to be for UBI, but then his friend had trouble hiring people for his restaurant since workers were receiving pandemic unemployment benefits and being more selective about employment, so now he's against it.

He was for it initially on the grounds that it would give people the freedom to pursue things they were passionate about. But then in a situation analogous to UBI (extended and boosted UI benefits), because he doesn't like how they choose to use their freedom (i.e. not working at a restaurant), he now switched his view.

The reason for his switch seems illogical given his initial view, since people are acting consistently with his own initial expectations. Maybe it's just as simple as he doesn't like it because his buddy is struggling, which is a very simplistic manner of evaluating something.

Additionally, I don't think the restaurant industry should be used as a yardstick to measure the success of a UBI-like measure. Its success depends on exploitation. If the economy were strong, restaurants would not be able to hire college-educated workers for pennies on the dollar as they do now. And if not for lax border policies, they wouldn't be able to exploit cheap immigrant labor. It seems like one of the foundations of the restaurant industry in the US is exploitation, without which it would collapse. Pretty shady overall.

Very strange and irrational take by Joe.

"We should have UBI so people can follow their passion"

"I agree, can't wait to quit this shitty server gig"

"Wait!"

But don't you think his point was more along the lines of, "I thought it would work and that people would still be productive and the economy would still function and create wealth (which, incidentally, is a pretty key factor in even being able to generate the revenues necessary to logistically pay out a UBI), but when something like it went into practice, that's not what happened; instead labour became scarce, businesses started struggling, production went down, the supply chain clogged up, inflation took hold, and the whole thing started to look like a Ponzi scheme that couldn't work"?

Full disclosure: I've owned and operated a cafe. The restaurant industry isn't nearly as exploitative as you think. Often the owners are taking home the lesser hourly wage of the entire staff (which is why you see them working there for 14 hours a day; because no one else will work for $4 per hour and no tips). And the reason they are able to hire college educated workers is because college educated workers like the tips.

All that aside, as production increases through technology, we're going to get to a place where some form or other of a UBI is the norm. We aren't there yet, though. We'll need to advance in AI, first. More importantly, it's a bit of a weird sort of leap to try to go from a pretty full labour force where at least 1 and more often 2 members of a household work 40 hour weeks to an economy that pays people to stay home and still seems to figure on a 40 hour work week from people who want to work.

Feels like what we're really due for is a reduction in the work week. We've been doing this 5 day, 40 hour thing for a century now. Before the New Deal it was closer to 6 days, 60 hours for most people. A 4 day, 30 hour work week feels like a good intermediate point to try out at least before we go to paying people to stay home outright.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Heh. Glad I stopped watching the JRE so many years ago so I didn't have to witness such a terrible decline.

Though that premise for UBI reeks of 1970's upper class socialists who never mingled with real people a day in their lives, and expect everyone to become artists and poets. It's a shit take. It should just be an anti-poverty tool.

Yeah idk about trying to sell UBI with the idea that more people will follow their dream of becoming a stand up comic or whtever. If you're not going to market it as an anti-poverty policy at least make an appeal that it'll spur entrepreneurship. I think there is some data that this might've happen after all the COVID relief was dispersed but I don't have any source off hand so take that with a grain of salt.

 

[CaptHANDSUP]

Why is it that the people who scream for UBI are also the ones screaaming the loudest about their inability to "build generational wealth".

Yea, you're sure to finally move your family out of the ghetto and be able to pass on a house and/or inheritances to your children on your $1,000 a month free handout.

“you’re not gonna become mega-wealthy with some reasonable financial assistance so you might as well stay dirt poor. There is no middle ground.” That is what you sound like.

Regardless I disagree with UBI because it’s basically hush money for underpaying everyone. You can’t complain about your shitty wage when you’re getting ubi, it’ll be the perfect opportunity for boomers to call everyone else lazy.

 

[jeremyemilio]

lol... don't even know what to say.

UBI is universal, without condition.

Unemployment is only paid out if you're unemployed. There's a clear disincentive to go back to work, because if you do you lose your benefits.

So again, since they're not the same thing, I don't see how pandemic UI benefits tell us that much about society under UBI. You even allude to this in your own post, since UBI stacks on top of regular income, there isn't as clear of a disincentive to work.

try not to be so block-headed.

I mean, you make a good point... but the people in your video don't really grapple with the issue on anywhere nearing this level of logic or reason. The first 11 minutes of this is pretty much them literally shitting on the idea of restaurants existing at all ("elitists just like ordering people around").

And, yes, beyond this there is the inconvenient question of: Who in hell is going to do the like 2/3 of jobs that no one really much feels like doing but that people do because they need to feed their family? I mean, I'm asking that question in good faith, not as a sort of gotcha.

They talk about paying people "enough to eat" and don't even wade into the problem of food, which is an exceptionally physically arduous and labour intensive industry. On food alone I don't see how you avoid a spiral into inflationary hell. An awful lot of people working in food production wouldn't stay in that job if they didn't have to in order to feed their families. So now to get that labour force back, you need to raise industry wages dramatically. And since food production is so labour intensive, that means you need to raise food prices dramatically. And now the UBI no longer pays out "enough to eat" and you're right back where you started.

But at least you'll have a roof over your head, right? Well have you ever spent a day roofing? Because I have, and nobody's doing that if they don't have to either.

That's without even getting into digging ditches and cleaning toilets. Are we just going to live in a world of washed out roads and filthy bathrooms? Until we get AI and automation that is capable of those sorts of things, I just don't see how we get there.

I think part of the issue here (if I'm interpreting the sentiments of the people in your video correctly, and I really am trying to) is that there's a certain segment who views it as being some sort of tragedy that a person would do something they'd rather not do because they have a responsibility to take care of themselves and their family. I wholeheartedly disagree with that. In fact, I would suggest that taking care of yourself and others through sacrifice and honest work that contributes to the greater good is one of the things that gives meaning to life.

None of which discounts your point that Covid relief and extended Unemployment benefits can't be compared, apples to apples, against a UBI. Where a UBI might dullen the incentive to work, Unemployment/Covid relief checks actually create a disincentive to work precisely because they aren't universal and go away if you do work. (But the behaviours that they brought about did give us a glimpse into human nature, and I do agree with Rogan that in this aspect, at least, the scenario is relevant to the discussion.)

 

[Gutter Chris]

It doesn't really make sense but Rogan just spitballs ideas out there. I really like the guy but yeah, I take his political opinions with a grain of salt to say the least.

Rogan is like water and takes the shape of whatever container you pour him in. Mostly I think he's very agreeable as a person and it makes his stances wishy washy. I find him and his show entertaining but grain of salt indeed.

Also this seems like a kinda duh thing. No one wants to work in a restaurant if they don't have to. It's very high stress and very low reward. I think the entire industry of food workers probably needs a union. I'm too busy to watch a 20 minute video atm . Did Joe say what his friend was paying ?

 

[jeremyemilio]

Yeah idk about trying to sell UBI with the idea that more people will follow their dream of becoming a stand up comic or whtever. If you're not going to market it as an anti-poverty policy at least make an appeal that it'll spur entrepreneurship. I think there is some data that this might've happen after all the COVID relief was dispersed but I don't have any source off hand so take that with a grain of salt.

This is an interesting take. I'm not sure it's something I've heard, though. However, as a general principle, I do feel that there's something to that sort of approach. Related, I think:

I grew up in a small city in maritime Canada. When I was a kid, the major industry here was CN rail, which used to be a crown corporation. In 1995 they sold to a private group, and in the leadup to the finalization of the sale (which took a a few years), the corporate interests taking over signaled that they would be centralizing in Quebec, meaning that they were basically pulling out of our city where they were our biggest employer (and amongst the highest paying). The Federal government tried to negotiate with them to convince them to stay, but as it became clear that the price tag was just going to be much too high, ultimately decided to go another route; they took the money and tax incentives that they would have given the company to make them stick around and paid them out to the employees as large severance and retirement packages.

Long story short, the general consensus was that the CN pullout would gut our city. But the opposite happened. Those former employees took those severance packages and started their own businesses, used their retirement funds to build homes and expand the city, and we've been in a 25 year boom in a province that has been in a 25 year bust. While the rest of the province shrinks, our city grows (prior to the pandemic we had the five years of second highest immigration rate of any city in the country). All because government felt it's hand was forced and decided, for once, to put money in the hands of regular people instead of corporate interests.

(The approach looks especially astute when compared to the trajectory of the closest neighboring city where the province poured millions and millions of dollars into a paper mill for a couple of decades, literally paying 100% of the mill's labour costs, to keep it open, only to have it close literally imediatly after the province cut off the checks. You wanna talk about a place being gutted. Hard not to try to imagine what could have been if they'd told the mill to fuck off and just taken that money and paid out the employees up front, instead.)

 

[jeremyemilio]

Rogan is like water and takes the shape of whatever container you pour him in. Mostly I think he's very agreeable as a person and it makes his stances wishy washy. I find him and his show entertaining but grain of salt indeed.

Also this seems like a kinda duh thing. No one wants to work in a restaurant if they don't have to. It's very high stress and very low reward. I think the entire industry of food workers probably needs a union. I'm too busy to watch a 20 minute video atm . Did Joe say what his friend was paying ?

Margins are razor thin in the restaurant business. Most restaurants lose money on most days. The idea that most restaurant owners are just assholes who like to exploit their staff so they can live the big life doesn't hold up. The reason they don't pay higher wages is because if they did they would go under. Most of them go under as it is.

 

[ElKarlo]

OR, most workplaces as structured are mind-numbing, hierarchical shitholes and people would avoid them given the least bit of economic freedom.

Maybe if workplaces were structured in a manner more congenial to the average person's spirit, people would enjoy coming to work.

Enter the coop and worker-managed businesses.

Why can’t it be both? People are he rally very lazy and that companies tend to be awful in how they treat their workers?

 

[jeremyemilio]

OR, most workplaces as structured are mind-numbing, hierarchical shitholes and people would avoid them given the least bit of economic freedom.

Maybe if workplaces were structured in a manner more congenial to the average person's spirit, people would enjoy coming to work.

Enter the coop and worker-managed businesses.

Well... but why do so few people work for coops and worker-managed businesses, though? It's not like they're some sort of illegal business structure.

It's almost like most people would prefer to have a steady paycheck in a job that they can leave anytime, or that can go under anytime, without losing their shirt, and are okay with letting the entrepreneurs take on the start up costs, the risks, and the 75 hour weeks with no pay during hard times just to keep the place alive another day in hopes that the business will someday be profitable and they can salvage their investment and, if they're really lucky, their house, their marriage, and their family.

 

[jeremyemilio]

Unemployment is not "close to" UBI with respect to peoples' willingness to work. It enforces a penalty for working, not the same thing.

Most people wouldn't stop working under UBI. A minority which was already predisposed to not working might stop for a period.

You do realize this is the standard Conservative talking point against social safety nets, right? The "moral hazard" thing?

"If you give increased welfare benefits to single moms it enforces a penalty for getting married and using birth control."

I feel like if we were in a Covid thread instead of a UBI thread, you'd be less inclined toward this position... and might even be offended by it upon seeing it expressed by someone else.

 

[SouthpawSouthernFist]

You do realize this is the standard Conservative talking point against social safety nets, right? The "moral hazard" thing?

"If you give increased welfare benefits to single moms it enforces a penalty for getting married and using birth control."

I feel like if we were in a Covid thread instead of a UBI thread, you'd be less inclined toward this position... and might even be offended by it upon seeing it expressed by someone else.

I'm not against unemployment, people pay into it. And I'm not against the disincentive for working either. While the pandemic was raging, it was good that people had the option to stay home.

 

[SouthpawSouthernFist]

Well... but why do so few people work for coops and worker-managed businesses, though? It's not like they're some sort of illegal business structure.

It's almost like most people would prefer to have a steady paycheck in a job that they can leave anytime, or that can go under anytime, without losing their shirt, and are okay with letting the entrepreneurs take on the start up costs, the risks, and the 75 hour weeks with no pay during hard times just to keep the place alive another day in hopes that the business will someday be profitable and they can salvage their investment and, if they're really lucky, their house, their marriage, and their family.

Why is hardly anyone in a union when it's in their interest to be in one? Well, that's starting to change as people realize that. I'm not saying worker coops are about to pop off, but it's possible in the future viable alternatives for structuring the workplace take off.

 

[Bald1]

Margins are razor thin in the restaurant business. Most restaurants lose money on most days. The idea that most restaurant owners are just assholes who like to exploit their staff so they can live the big life doesn't hold up. The reason they don't pay higher wages is because if they did they would go under. Most of them go under as it is.

Yeah. The hospitality industry as a whole operates on razor thin profit margins. It's a 100% luxury venture that's wholely reliant on the economy, is a very competitive field with overhead that the operator has little control over and is the first thing people cut out of their budgets if any need arises to do so. Nevermind there's completely lean months during every year. Something like 40% of restaurants, pubs and clubs go under within their first year. The ones that survive are the exception not the norm. Tough market.

 

[Ruprecht]

Margins are razor thin in the restaurant business. Most restaurants lose money on most days. The idea that most restaurant owners are just assholes who like to exploit their staff so they can live the big life doesn't hold up. The reason they don't pay higher wages is because if they did they would go under. Most of them go under as it is.

That's just the market conditions though. If hospitality workers have a decent minimum wage and aren't reliant on gratuities, then overall the prices would increase and the market would shrink to accommodate that. Restaurants would still be on even footing in regards to labour and wouldn't have to rely on extremely low wages to be competitive. Then you just have to have independent watchdogs watch out for politicians cutting out loopholes for their largest donors, such as "workplace agreements" and perpetual "trainees" to undercut minimum wage.

 

[Jesus X]

Kind of a weird take. He used to be for UBI, but then his friend had trouble hiring people for his restaurant since workers were receiving pandemic unemployment benefits and being more selective about employment, so now he's against it.

He was for it initially on the grounds that it would give people the freedom to pursue things they were passionate about. But then in a situation analogous to UBI (extended and boosted UI benefits), because he doesn't like how they choose to use their freedom (i.e. not working at a restaurant), he now switched his view.

The reason for his switch seems illogical given his initial view, since people are acting consistently with his own initial expectations. Maybe it's just as simple as he doesn't like it because his buddy is struggling, which is a very simplistic manner of evaluating something.

Additionally, I don't think the restaurant industry should be used as a yardstick to measure the success of a UBI-like measure. Its success depends on exploitation. If the economy were strong, restaurants would not be able to hire college-educated workers for pennies on the dollar as they do now. And if not for lax border policies, they wouldn't be able to exploit cheap immigrant labor. It seems like one of the foundations of the restaurant industry in the US is exploitation, without which it would collapse. Pretty shady overall.

Very strange and irrational take by Joe.

Is UBI causing this? I have seen now hiring signs at a lot of restaurants I was wondering what was going on my favorite restaurant is closing at 3pm every day now they have no staff

 

[Loiosh]

Most of them go under as it is.

I heard it's like 90-95%.

 

[So Fresh]

Where I live the restaurant and clubs business is one of the most awful sectors to work in. Of course you have small single owner businesses who tend to take better care of their employees. But a lot is owned by multiple business owners who own 6-10 bars/ restaurant and hire the most cheap and best exploitable people (students, immigrants). They expect people to work hard, get paid little, make crazy hours, sometimes have to wait (unpaid) doing nothing, get lousy contracts, etc. Funny things is they were also the ones who were bitching the loudest and the most during covid (and the first to fire their employees).

All the while driving around in expensive sport cars, getting named in magazines (something like Forbes), etc.

I have little to no sympathy for those people and can’t be make to care that they can’t get employees now. That’s what you get when you treat your personnel like replaceable shit.

 

[jeremyemilio]

That's just the market conditions though. If hospitality workers have a decent minimum wage and aren't reliant on gratuities, then overall the prices would increase and the market would shrink to accommodate that. Restaurants would still be on even footing in regards to labour and wouldn't have to rely on extremely low wages to be competitive. Then you just have to have independent watchdogs watch out for politicians cutting out loopholes for their largest donors, such as "workplace agreements" and perpetual "trainees" to undercut minimum wage.

Oh, yes. I get that. And it's true. But I'm not sure that would be a popular change among restaurant employees (or at least servers). My sense is that a lot of them quite like being in the industry specifically because they prefer the potential earnings generated through tips to a job with a traditional hourly wage. I don't feel like they come out ahead in that changeover. But I do agree that it's the way things should be.

 

[So Fresh]

But don't you think his point was more along the lines of, "I thought it would work and that people would still be productive and the economy would still function and create wealth (which, incidentally, is a pretty key factor in even being able to generate the revenues necessary to logistically pay out a UBI), but when something like it went into practice, that's not what happened; instead labour became scarce, businesses started struggling, production went down, the supply chain clogged up, inflation took hold, and the whole thing started to look like a Ponzi scheme that couldn't work"?

Full disclosure: I've owned and operated a cafe. The restaurant industry isn't nearly as exploitative as you think. Often the owners are taking home the lesser hourly wage of the entire staff (which is why you see them working there for 14 hours a day; because no one else will work for $4 per hour and no tips). And the reason they are able to hire college educated workers is because college educated workers like the tips.

All that aside, as production increases through technology, we're going to get to a place where some form or other of a UBI is the norm. We aren't there yet, though. We'll need to advance in AI, first. More importantly, it's a bit of a weird sort of leap to try to go from a pretty full labour force where at least 1 and more often 2 members of a household work 40 hour weeks to an economy that pays people to stay home and still seems to figure on a 40 hour work week from people who want to work.

Feels like what we're really due for is a reduction in the work week. We've been doing this 5 day, 40 hour thing for a century now. Before the New Deal it was closer to 6 days, 60 hours for most people. A 4 day, 30 hour work week feels like a good intermediate point to try out at least before we go to paying people to stay home outright.

The difference is, it wasn’t UBI and it was during a global pandemic with lockdowns. If you bass your whole opinion on something like UBI based on an exceptional situation like this, you’re doing something wrong. Besides that, there are a few examples where it did work. I believe Alaska has something like an UBI in the form of oil dividend. Seems to work there.

 

[Ruprecht]

Oh, yes. I get that. And it's true. But I'm not sure that would be a popular change among restaurant employees (or at least servers). My sense is that a lot of them quite like being in the industry specifically because they prefer the potential earnings generated through tips to a job with a traditional hourly wage. I don't feel like they come out ahead in that changeover. But I do agree that it's the way things should be.

Possibly not, I mean over here those bottom rung hospitality gigs are essentially limited to under 16s precisely due to the relative lack of skill required and the low earnings potential.
The minimum wage is $20.33 p/h (AUD) for 21 year olds. For "juniors" that decreases down per year to the minimum age (without an exemption permit) of 15 to $7.48 per hour. That equates to 36.8% of the adult minimum wage (which is set to rise $1 this year). Fast food and waiting tables is basically seen as a step up from your primary school paper round job (which are subject to specific permits and conditions).
You can tell the class of an establishment by whether they actually employ adults (also usually required for licenced premises).
Of course we don't have a tipping culture.