The market price signalling will still be corrupted, and inflation will still be a factor because the most in-demand goods will be less available and have to rise in price to meet demand.
Why are you assuming that the production won't rise? Automation/Technology is already helping us to overproduce. We are closer to the post-scarcity era than you think. Like even if Apple wanted to give out 8 billion iPhones for free they could be produced in this day and age. We aren't living in the 50s. Technology is there and is improving constantly. Also, Laws of economics aren't set in stone like laws of nature. People like you need to understand that. Why do you assume that governments will print out money to pay for UBI? That's not the case. The idea of UBI is to shift the money from one class to another, So inflation isn't an issue with UBI.
You might want to look up "the tragedy of the commons".
You throw out terms like "tragedy of the commons" but fail to cite sources where this was actually proved...
Yes, you won't tell me. How convenient you can't even clearly and simply define your premise and rely on some video to think for you.
Alright, let's start with Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs Link:
https://academic.oup.com/wbro/article/32/2/155/4098285Since you are going to accept whatever I say as truth. The trails done in Canada in the 1970s showed that less than 1% of the participants left their work. Those who left their jobs were moms who left work for taking care of their newborns. Also, participants reduced their work hours by less than 10% on average and those who did, they spent their time looking for new jobs or going back to school to learn new skills. I mean what more can you ask?
These are very simple economics concepts that are well accepted, and considered laws based on past economic behavior. If you give people things they do not have to work for, those things are consumed more, but the actual value of the money becomes debased because they produced nothing to get those things. Money does not just represent work it represents capital. Capital (ie things) are not infinite and regardless of how much you automate this will not change. Resources are finite. Market price signaling is the ONLY THING that is giving an accurate signal to the people who produce those things, what the fair market value of their products are. When you hand out free money, it means these resources are consumed, but these people paid no cost for it, and the true market prices are corrupted by this influx. This long term results in shortages and supply problems. These are all well known and accepted economic concepts. Postmodernism is not an acceptable substitute.
I mentioned tragedy of the commons because it is a general concept that people don't appreciate or take care of collective possession as well as they do their own. IE if they don't pay the cost to gain the thing then they are less likely to appreciate or care for it. There is nothing to disprove here, just an idea you might benefit from examining critically because this seems to be a foreign concept to you.
BTW, Canada still operates under Capitalism.
"debunking" a claim I did not make is not a premise. A premise is a claim, or truth, you hold to be true. Try making a claim you feel to be true and introduce evidence to support it. This is not debate, this is you putting up a straw man no one asked for, beating him with a stick, and declaring victory.
