Request For Research: Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#431

Post by johngalt » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:26 PM UTC

In the same way that PG described wealth inequality at the top, there are also a number of reasons people aren't prosperous. Certainly poverty can be a roadblock to someone who would otherwise be prosperous, but we are fooling ourselves if we believe that is the case for all. There are starving artists, but there are also people who will just do the minimum required at any point. In my opinion there are two problems here.

1. How to maximize the number of prosperous people.

2. Ensure that those who will never be prosperous still aren't going to starve.

Incentives clearly matter in human behavior. Which is why I believe a negative income tax would be a better system than BI. Choose a livable stipend with free time or the alternative is digging ditches for very little difference in pay? I know what my choice would be. Conversely taking a low paying or part time job to supplement a negative income tax could eventually turn into a few years of experience on a resume to take the next step up.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#432

Post by jgord » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:26 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #116

jdoliner wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered if its actually the joblessness that degrades people's self worth or the job search that must not be going to well and thus keeps them jobless. Would a person without a job but with a basic income and thus not feeling pressure to get a job experience the same hit to their self worth?

People value money they earn more highly than money they are given (, about twice as much from what I've read). In addition to that, many people get a sense of purpose from their work, as they feel they are contributing to something, and through a sense of fellow-feeling with their fellow workers, even though they may find it stressful and/or tedious.

There are some forms of work that are useful to society and rewarding, which don't pay enough to live on - volunteering in a hospice or school for example.

In this case the person doing the work might both derive self-worth and view the basic income as being 'earned' .. and hence value it as much as a traditional salary [ and not 'waste' it ].

I think basic income could fill a lot of little niches where the market economy is not perfectly efficient in allocating money to value - some of these are being explored thru approaches like Patreon and IndieGoGo and freelancer sites.. but maybe Basic Income is an even better way to reach more of these niches ?

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#433

Post by bryanlarsen » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:27 PM UTC

jakeogh wrote: post #399

bryanlarsen wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "cheque" with "direct deposit" and what time is wasted? You have to do taxes every year anyways. And what little time is wasted is offset by the sense of security that $200/week is going into your bank account every week like clockwork no matter happens to you or your job.

I take issue with the idea that government should use violence to take from some people and give to others, the "You have to" (or we throw you on a cage or worse) is the problem. The money and time wasted is the huge infrastructure to enforce the ever growing list of restrictions.

And I take issue with the idea that taxes are theft. Without society, you'd be a subsistence farmer. Any income you earn above that of a subsistence farmer is enabled by society.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#434

Post by arohner » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:27 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #358

stcredzero wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equally credible alternatives to university education for professions that don't involve students shouldering $100k-$200k in debt based on decisions they have to make when they're 18 years old. Why not just free university education for people who have the prerequisite academic qualifications?

* There are limited seats available at the highest-status universities, so admission to those schools will remain a privilege disproportionately available to wealthy parents who can pay to game the admissions process. * Simply attending a 4-year university has costs beyond tuition and books; there are plenty of people who don't go to college because they can't afford 4 years out of the workforce. * The 4-year univers…

Yes. I'll also add the 4-year education is incredibly inefficient, in terms of skills added over time. Even in highly technical STEM degrees, you probably don't need 4 years "full time" to gain all of the skills an employer expects a fresh-out-of-school STEM graduate to have. The same is even more true of less technical degrees.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#435

Post by vkou » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:27 PM UTC

logfromblammo wrote: post #384

larsiusprime wrote: post #32

What I want to know is whether Basic Income implemented with our current housing and laws about land ownership will just run afoul of the Henry George Theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George_theorem IE, the aggregate value of public spending in an area tends to soak into the land value -- give everybody $X,000 a year and the landlords will dutifully raise annual rents by $X,000.

I think it will. To avoid it, a significant portion of Basic Income would have to be paid out as goods and services vouchers with redemption limits. Rather than getting $50 a day as cash, you might get 4 nutritionally balanced but generally unpalatable meal rations, two payment vouchers for one day in one state-owned 250 sq.ft. housing capsule, 30 kWh of metered electricity, 100 gallons of potable water, 10 Gb of net…

You'll then get an extremely inefficient black market for payment vouchers (Or the goods you can get from them.)

See: Food stamps.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#436

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:27 PM UTC

logfromblammo wrote: post #384

larsiusprime wrote: post #32

What I want to know is whether Basic Income implemented with our current housing and laws about land ownership will just run afoul of the Henry George Theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George_theorem IE, the aggregate value of public spending in an area tends to soak into the land value -- give everybody $X,000 a year and the landlords will dutifully raise annual rents by $X,000.

I think it will. To avoid it, a significant portion of Basic Income would have to be paid out as goods and services vouchers with redemption limits. Rather than getting $50 a day as cash, you might get 4 nutritionally balanced but generally unpalatable meal rations, two payment vouchers for one day in one state-owned 250 sq.ft. housing capsule, 30 kWh of metered electricity, 100 gallons of potable water, 10 Gb of net…

[deleted]

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#437

Post by undersuit » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:27 PM UTC

andy_ppp wrote: post #177

I'd like to see this sort of research too... I'd also like to see things like the tax system be used to make changes to income inequality - both in terms of like for like pay as well as to some extent evening up the pay professions each sex choose to go into. i.e. if you are a woman you get tax off up to a certain amount because society screws over your pay for getting pregnant. I'd also love to see meat taxed on a t…

I think you're going after just meat when you should be going after all manufactured foods. Meat prices are kept low in part by the same sort of subsidies that keep poptarts, fruit rollups, and white bread cheap. Force meat to be an expensive product, let the animals live on large tracts of land, eating naturally with minimal assistance, and deal with the occasional predation or with the additional effort to protect your animals from predation.

Taxing meat as we have now hurts the consumers and lets the manufacturers continue with wasteful, unethical, and harmful practices.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#438

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:28 PM UTC

surfmike wrote: post #346

ThomPete wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is that a country like Denmark have all those things more or less and we still have more or less the same issues although to lesser degree. The solution to the problem isn't hiding in what we already know although many of these things of course would be hugely beneficial to people. The underlying problem. Technology is still going to be there.

I'd say the bottom 50% live much more prosperously in Denmark than in the US.

[deleted]

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#439

Post by ThomPete » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:28 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #333

ThomPete wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is that a country like Denmark have all those things more or less and we still have more or less the same issues although to lesser degree. The solution to the problem isn't hiding in what we already know although many of these things of course would be hugely beneficial to people. The underlying problem. Technology is still going to be there.

I don't know enough about Denmark to evaluate your comment, but stipulate that it's true, and then, if you'd like to reframe my list as "a list of things startups could do to use the market to make the US more like Denmark", I would have no objection.

Sure but Basic Income is about something else, something bigger. It's about solving the fact that everyone is going to be out of a job. If you only go to it by thinking you have to find a solution to the current workforce and income distribution problem then you are missing the real problem. Denmark pays a lot in taxes, free healthcare, free education (even university), students get paid to study, redistribute wealth quite a lot and so on.

Problem is still there. The rich get richer compared to the poor while everyone is getting richer overall.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#440

Post by JoblessWonder » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 9:28 PM UTC

> What can startups do to increase prosperity for everyone?

I think it might be best to create a different thread since this is a separate and important question than the "Basic Income" debate that is also interesting and happening in the same comments. Either way, here are my thoughts:

You can take that question a few of different ways. What can all startups do within their current processes/products? What is a startup idea that will increase prosperity for everyone? What can startups do in addition to their current product to help prosperity for everyone?

I'm also taking the view that raising the prosperity for the lowest individuals will in turn increase the prosperity for everyone else. I think having productive people in our society who do not need to worry about the basic needs will increase the success of our society. If you don't agree with me on that, then everything below is probably not what you are looking for.

I think that setting aside funding regularly to donate to non-affiliated non-profits would be a great start. Most startups don't have the capacity (or desire) to reinvent themselves as charitable organizations. Creating a curated list of non-profits across different factors that contribute to prosperity (education, housing, jobs) and encouraging companies to commit to donating would help. I taught a relationship skills class with my wife for people on public assistance for the past 5 years until our federal grant ended last fall. I honestly believe helping those couples be in a better relationship helps them be better parents which gives the kids a greater chance to succeed. However, when the grant ended we had to close up shop and shut down the whole organization. Funding for these types of programs is so hard to come by that adding anything to the pool would be a great first step.

As far as what sort of startups can be developed to help increase prosperity I think you can segment it again into two views: The long view or the short view. The long view is done by helping ensure the future generation's increased prosperity. Things like increased quality of education and training, family life, and access to technology.

The short view ones are things that would improve access to a basic level of housing, food, healthcare and education. Worrying about those things (and probably more) are going to make it harder for people to be successful. It isn't impossible, just more difficult. I think that gathering and analyzing data would be a great start for a startup. There is a ton of information out there. The grant I mentioned above collected surveys from thousands of couples nationwide over a period of years. I'm sure there are grants funding programs that are delivering information on all types of topics. Utilizing that information to help prioritize what is effective or whatever you can glean from it would be an interesting startup. Using that information to develop a wishlist of product ideas to fund would be interesting for a VC.

(This isn't my best writing/thinking. It is just sort of a brain dump to hopefully fuel some comments by someone.)