Live data from Hacker News

Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

nerdinvest.blogspot.com

151–158 of 158 posts

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#151

Let's say that currently rent is $1,000 per month, food is $500, and Alice is earning $2,500. Now UBI is implemented and Alice and all fellow citizens receive $1,000 per month. What will keep the market from easing the entry level rent up to $1,500 and food to $1,000 since the money is available? At first glance it seems like we'd just be choosing a different number representing "broke".

Draw it out into the absurd to watch it work: Consider a society with 2 members, Mr Rich (net worth $10M) and Mr. Poor (net worth $100). Mr. Rich is 100,000 X richer than Mr. Poor right now. Institute a ridiculous UBI of $1M/year for everyone. At the end of the year, Mr. Poor has $1,000,100 and Mr Rich has $11M but Mr Rich is now only ~ 11 X richer than Mr Poor. Now sure cheeseburgers at Micky-D's are now $700 but th…

except mr. rich is now making more for producing micky-d burgers

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#153
post #152

> A socialists pipe dream, you might say. A common misunderstanding. BI is not socialism. Socialism: A political theory advocating state ownership of industry.

BI is certainly the type of thing many actual.socialists have proposed, and the definition of socialism you post is, while perhaps what made ght be found in a particularly compact general dictionaries, not particularly accurate or complete, even by the standard of general dictionary definitions.

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#154
post #152

> A socialists pipe dream, you might say. A common misunderstanding. BI is not socialism. Socialism: A political theory advocating state ownership of industry.

BI is certainly the type of thing many actual.socialists have proposed, and the definition of socialism you post is, while perhaps what made ght be found in a particularly compact general dictionaries, not particularly accurate or complete, even by the standard of general dictionary definitions.

Then post your definition and its source. I just googled six of them and they all matched mine.

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#155
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BI is certainly the type of thing many actual.socialists have proposed, and the definition of socialism you post is, while perhaps what made ght be found in a particularly compact general dictionaries, not particularly accurate or complete, even by the standard of general dictionary definitions.

Then post your definition and its source. I just googled six of them and they all matched mine.

Google's is pretty typical of not-unusually-compact general dictionary definitions, "a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

Unlike yours, it encompasses regulation (which redistributive taxation is generally recognized as a form of) and the focus is on "the community as a whole" (for which the state may be the tool used, or may not) and not just the "the state" as the focus (which is important, since without that it wouldn't include libertarian socialism.)

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#156
post #48
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that take into account that for middle class people it's effectively a wash? i.e. Your taxes go up $10,000, but you get a $10,000 payment. I haven't seen a cost calculation that explicitly factors this in. I imagine it's still expensive, but perhaps less than it seems? It's a good article though. A lot of people vastly overestimate current social payment expenditures. They're much lower than I thought, and I am…

You still need an administration that handles all that money coming in and out, probably doubling the amount of money Revenu Québec manages. All that for a poverty line payment of 10k.

Right, but that administration already exists for social payments, except the majority of the administration is in the gatekeeping side: Making sure that the people who are claiming are entitled to it. Remove that administration and you make large savings.

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#157
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is talking about generating new wealth to make this happen: it's pure consumption and some of that will be at the expense of capital investment. I've been talking about how minimum income can make the minimum wage obsolete and thus allow for the existence of a wider variety of jobs (and creation of wealth) that was previously unviable while also fixing the market inefficiencies created by putting an artifici…

> Wealth exists only within an economy and thus is a social construct that makes it's owner intrinsically beholden to that society. Wealth thus increases the moral obligation to the society from which that wealth is derived. This notion pops up quite a bit in HN discussion of basic income. Can anybody provide some references to any sort of scholarly work on this concept? Presumably it has been described and discussed…

> Can anybody provide some references to any sort of scholarly work on this concept?

I didn't realize this concept wasn't self evident. If you have a million dollars, but the economy doesn't value dollars, you have no wealth. I don't have any scholarly references but I would guess you would find discussion of this in the philosophy of economics.

> What does 'intrinsically beholden' mean? These seem like arbitrary and poorly defined assertions to me.

Beholden means "owing thanks or having a duty to someone". 'Intrinsic' (like 'Natural') is a rather empty word, but I was intending it to express that the beholdenment to society arises from the wealth's reliance on society for its existence.

Since the value and existence of your wealth is due to your presence within an economy and society, you are beholden for your wealth to that economy and society in that your wealth would not exist without that economy and society.

> Do you imagine it enough to provide food, shelter, clothing?

Eventually? Yes. I would personally slowly phase in the minimum income as I phased out the minimum wage. Ideally this would cover basic needs and then it would be up to society to determine how much past basic needs would be covered.

> If so explain what other mechanisms would prevent the emergence of a large group of people who simply lived off the efforts of others as a choice.

We all 'live off the efforts of others'. I do not farm the food that I eat, nor do I enforce the laws that allow me to live in safety.

I think what you mean instead, is probably more along the lines of 'live without working'.

Our current model of being dependent on perpetual growth is unsustainable. We already do not have enough low skill jobs for our low skill population. As automation and machine learning take more and more jobs, this problem will only become worse. The new jobs that are being added, tend to be higher skilled knowledge economy jobs.

Thus, we are left with two choices:

1) don't allow people who don't work to live

2) allow people who live without working.

Since I don't support genocide, I feel we have to go with option 2), and the best way of doing that is providing a Minimum Income.

I would also point out, that there is a great deal of work that gets done without expectation of financial reward. This ranges from volunteering time working on open source software, to creating art, to caring for sick friends and relatives. Thus I don't buy into the "work only happens when people are paid" and I think plenty of value will be produced by people who rely on minimum income.

Besides money: Boredom, Social Status, Altruism and Passion can all be strong motivations to work.

A final point here is that by replacing the minimum wage with a minimum income, we greatly increase the number of jobs that can be profitably created. I may not be able to afford to pay the current minimum wage to have a gardener take care of my yard, but with a lower minimum wage I might.

> What mechanism would keep that sort of system in equilibrium rather than the consuming group growing and the producing group shrinking and the resulting tensions escalating?

This is not an easy problem, but I would point out that we have a similar problem with wealth distribution currently.

As far as reducing tensions, I think we need to make an effort to keep classes from segregating themselves socially.

As far as maintaining equilibirium, I don't have any easy answers but I do believe they exist and probably involve some clever use of markets to maintain the equilibirium.

A slow initial introduction of the minimum income helps find tools to maintain the equilibrium as we go.

> And don't we want to construct a system that moves towards a state that maximizes the number of self-sufficient people rather maximizing the number of dependent people?

Like I said before, we are almost all dependent on each other and very few of us are truly self-sufficient.

I don't want to maximize the number of self-sufficient people. I want to maximize the number of people who have the opportunity to do what they love. I want to maximize the amount of enjoyable work that is accomplished.

Re: Powerful Political Forces Are Aligning Behind Minimum Income

#158
post #16
post #2

If you are in Quebec - join us at http://revenudebase.quebec In Canada: join us at : http://biencanada.ca

What do you think about Jean-Robert Sansfaçon's critique in Le Devoir ( http://www.ledevoir.com/economie/actualites-economiques/4624... ), where he calculates that to give only 10,000$ per inhabitant in Quebec per year, you would need 68 billion dollars, ~22 times the amount currently spent on social welfare. Also, that would constitute 70% of the current tax revenue of the Quebec government.

Machines will generate enormous excess wealth in the future
Post reply on HN