Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

huffingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 178 posts

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#21

Post by jacquesm »

paulsutter wrote: post #17
jacquesm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're supporting your retired parents that's a strong signal of a big failure at a societal level.

My parents would be fine without my support, but I'm supporting them anyway. How does that signal anything negative at all? ps. gfsn54nsf never said they needed his help, nor did he say that he's somehow forced to support them.

It's not a bad thing if you can afford it.

But if you can't then society should be right there and without such a catch-net people will have children to support them, not because they actually want children (they simply see them as an economic asset and a pension plan).

I strongly suspect that UBI will result in a net decrease in the birth rate wherever it is implemented.

For the record, I supported my mom for some years because (1) I could and (2) she needed it but if she could have kept herself afloat she would have definitely chosen that path instead (she got hit with a brain hemorrhage (sp?) and needed to go back to work long before she was physically able to).

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#22

Post by paulsutter »

JackFr wrote: post #7

If I read it correctly, in all of the case studies referenced in the article, the basic income provided was exogenous. That is, the basic income going to the villagers, was not coming from the villagers. So it's not surprising that everyone got chummy when the money flowed in. However a complete picture would show how the people paying felt about it.

The money for basic income will come from automation driven productivity improvements. Many of the people who are "paying for it" (ie, putting in the thousands of man-years to create those technologies) have exactly that intent, to free people from drudgery.

EDIT: pvnick, yes the consensus is measured in decades. Some think fewer, some think more, but yes and thanks.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#23

Post by jjaredsimpson »

JackFr wrote: post #7

If I read it correctly, in all of the case studies referenced in the article, the basic income provided was exogenous. That is, the basic income going to the villagers, was not coming from the villagers. So it's not surprising that everyone got chummy when the money flowed in. However a complete picture would show how the people paying felt about it.

This is makers v takers argument.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#24

Post by forrestthewoods »

philipov wrote: post #18
dclowd9901 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could live and not have a job I would have a job because I love awesome cars and people would pay me what I deserve to be paid because people who didn't want to work wouldn't be overcrowding the market. I want more than the basics and it requires money. You just want to practice your art. I'm happy to pay for you to do nothing so long as you're happy with me having far far more than you materially.

You are happy to say that because you don't currently have far, far more than everyone else, and so in your mind, "I get a lot more money, but I have to pay some of it back" sounds like a nice bargain. However, the people who already have far, far more wealth than everyone else have nothing to gain from that way of thinking, as they already have most of the wealth without having to pay UBI. So why would they allow it…

On a global level if you're posting on this board you almost certainly have far, far more than everyone else.

So by "everyone" you really mean "not everyone but only certain geographic groups of someone".

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#25

Post by chrispeel »

JackFr wrote: post #7

If I read it correctly, in all of the case studies referenced in the article, the basic income provided was exogenous. That is, the basic income going to the villagers, was not coming from the villagers. So it's not surprising that everyone got chummy when the money flowed in. However a complete picture would show how the people paying felt about it.

The 'unconditional' I take to mean that everyone, rich and poor, would get the same money. So even though the people with high income are paying more in taxes to cover this, they're also getting the same amount paid to them in a separate check. So yes, they're paying more in taxes, but they're also getting the same benefit as everyone else, and this will take some of the sting off.

UBI is an excellent libertarian/small-government solution.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#26

Post by TeMPOraL »

donatj wrote: post #4

If I could live and not have a job, I wouldn't have a job. I could do my art and enjoy my life and the economy would crumble while everyone else watches Netflix.

If I could live and not have a job, I wouldn't have a job either. I could grow as an engineer, finally pivot into biotech, finish the couple of open source projects I know would be useful to many as opposed to the bullshit job I have in webdev (had, actually, right now I'm finally working on something remotely useful - manufacturing management). The economy would be totally fucking fine, enjoyed by all people, many of whom gotten bored to near-death after watching Netflix for an entire month and decided to follow their passions instead - passions they never had time to follow, because they had to work their asses off in low-paying jobs so that their families could eat a warm meal every other day.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#27

Post by darkmighty »

donatj wrote: post #5
jacquesm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're supporting your retired parents that's a strong signal of a big failure at a societal level.

I disagree. That's why you have children.

Wait, is that the reason you would have children?

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#28

Post by Turing_Machine »

lmz wrote: post #14
Turing_Machine wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That philosophy is directly responsible for overpopulation. If you need to have children to keep from starving to death when you're old, you'll want to have a lot of them. Note that the areas where this is true are precisely the ones with catastrophically high birth rates, and the areas where there are pensions, social programs, etc. are precisely the ones where population is stable, or even falling.

> Note that the areas where this is true are precisely the ones with catastrophically high birth rates, and the areas where there are pensions, social programs, etc. are precisely the ones where population is stable, or even falling. And then those countries with pensions and falling population are mentioned as ones who need to import immigrants in order to keep their pension pyramid scheme working...

Well, you could do other things to encourage more births. It's been done before, with significant success.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#29

Post by meric »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #24
philipov wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are happy to say that because you don't currently have far, far more than everyone else, and so in your mind, "I get a lot more money, but I have to pay some of it back" sounds like a nice bargain. However, the people who already have far, far more wealth than everyone else have nothing to gain from that way of thinking, as they already have most of the wealth without having to pay UBI. So why would they allow it…

On a global level if you're posting on this board you almost certainly have far, far more than everyone else. So by "everyone" you really mean "not everyone but only certain geographic groups of someone".

Yes, half the people on HN can save $200-300k, go to India and retire and live very well, yet, they don't.

Re: Universal Basic Income Will Likely Increase Social Cohesion

#30

Post by TeMPOraL »

philipov wrote: post #18
dclowd9901 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could live and not have a job I would have a job because I love awesome cars and people would pay me what I deserve to be paid because people who didn't want to work wouldn't be overcrowding the market. I want more than the basics and it requires money. You just want to practice your art. I'm happy to pay for you to do nothing so long as you're happy with me having far far more than you materially.

You are happy to say that because you don't currently have far, far more than everyone else, and so in your mind, "I get a lot more money, but I have to pay some of it back" sounds like a nice bargain. However, the people who already have far, far more wealth than everyone else have nothing to gain from that way of thinking, as they already have most of the wealth without having to pay UBI. So why would they allow it…

> However, the people who already have far, far more wealth than everyone else have nothing to gain from that way of thinking, as they already have most of the wealth without having to pay UBI. So why would they allow it?

That sounds less like a problem with the idea and more like an obstacle to implementation.

Also, what do the rich have to gain by not helping make UBI happen? Probably starvation, unrest and war as automation puts the lower ends of the economy out of jobs and destabilizes the society. Think at least French Revolution levels of mess. Some rich may survive, but their world would be quite shitty, and their conscience may not like it either.

What do they have to gain, on the other hand? A stable and growing society, able to continue on the path of scientific, technological growth. They'll maybe lose a zero from the bank account, but they get a fair shot at seeing the world improving for everyone, and being little less rich in a world that's much more wealthy is good - just like being a poor in XXI century West is much better than being a king in Medieval Europe.

I think smart rich people will totally go for it. Hell, I think some already say they want to.

Post reply on HN