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

Moving Forward on Basic Income

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#41

Post by jannotti »

xienze wrote: post #28
siphor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 5 years. Outlined in the link below https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income

So in other words, a long enough time to make people think they can draw reasonable conclusions about the viability of BI, when in actuality it's not long enough. You have to study the generational effects of this sort of thing. People are going to behave very differently when they know this will be around for a very short time versus the rest of their lives, nevermind how people behave when they're second or third g…

That's certainly an issue, but your demand stifles any effort to learn more by saying that you have to study "generational effects" (what, maybe a 50 year study before you can learn anything). Which will just be followed up by the equally valid criticism that you can only study this if everyone has BI (to see if it's the relative effect that matters).

Reasonable seeming concerns, but you have to start somewhere to learn anything.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#42

Post by ZenoArrow »

stevefeinstein wrote: post #24

I think tis is a step in the right direction, but I can't help but think that raising the floor still leaves people there on the floor. Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?

> "Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?"

Ideally you'd want UBI to increase with inflation. However, as the initial study is over 5 years the decrease in purchasing power by the end of the study is likely to be minimal.

There is a risk that companies that service low-income people will increase their prices faster than inflation, negating some of the benefits of UBI. The only guard I know of for this is strong competition and disciplined consumers, people have to be willing to express their dislike of price hikes by shopping elsewhere otherwise the system won't work. I'm guessing that monitoring price rises will be part of this YC-backed study.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#43

Post by alaskanloops »

xienze wrote: post #28
siphor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 5 years. Outlined in the link below https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income

So in other words, a long enough time to make people think they can draw reasonable conclusions about the viability of BI, when in actuality it's not long enough. You have to study the generational effects of this sort of thing. People are going to behave very differently when they know this will be around for a very short time versus the rest of their lives, nevermind how people behave when they're second or third g…

Yes but it's a starting point. Conducting a generational study will take, well, generations, and that's too long. Unfortunately the longer term, multi generation study will have to be "done in production" so to speak.

It may work, it may not. But what we're (the US) doing now isn't working.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#44

Post by mattkrisiloff »

Fede_V wrote: post #5

I think it's great YC is funding some interesting research. I'm a bit curious as to why they didn't partner with some established academics in this area (there's plenty of economists who have done excellent research here) rather than start a new program - but it's YC's money, and they can choose how to spend it. How open do you plan to be about things like datasets/analysis plans and so forth? I think this would be a…

In terms of data sets / analysis, we plan to be totally open and make them available.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#45

Post by bd »

mattkrisiloff wrote: post #25
siphor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 5 years. Outlined in the link below https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income

And pilot we're thinking 6 months to a year -- though still to be determined / could change.

I'm afraid with such short duration you'll not be able to observe true effects of basic income on people's behaviors.

It will be more something like "sabbatical" in academia - you can devote a time to some side projects (whether career related or pure leisure), but everything you'll do you'll do with considerations of how your life will proceed once the sabbatical is over and there is no more safety net (assuming rational actors).

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#46

Post by zappo2938 »

I grew up with basic income. In high school my parents gave me $25 a week. If I wanted a new bicycle or expensive sneakers I had to work. At the time $25 covered going to the movies on a Friday or $7 grand stand seats at Fenway.

Maybe we should look at how teenagers manage allowances.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#47

Post by danans »

As a resident of Oakland, I am excited about YC running this experiment here. I'm sure there will be plenty of debate over whether it's the best location, but it is definitely a place that provides a microcosm of many the issues BI hopes to address. It also has a population, regardless of where they are on socioeconomic spectrum, that is relatively open-minded to experiments like this.

I look forward to learning more details about their program.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#48

Post by flatline »

glibgil wrote: post #7

Have you given much thought to the effect of a participant taking on debt during your experiment?

Landlords and colleges are likely to gobble up as much of that free basic income as they possibly can. Payday lenders stand to make an even bigger killing than they do now. If not done carefully, it could result in an even more quickly widening wealth gap than we have now.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#49

Post by tlholaday »

kauffj wrote: post #34

Unfortunately, the explanation most consistent with data on happiness/satisfaction is that the primary utility gain from wealth is derived from gains in zero-sum social status. We can tell this even from the language of the post itself: "everyone should have enough money to meet their basic needs." Basic needs? Everyone in America has their basic needs. Almost all of the _basic_ needs of a human, i.e. those that we r…

> Everyone in America has their basic needs.

No. Not everyone in America has safety. The Americans living on the street report that the homeless shelters are too risky.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#50

Post by rincebrain »

diyseguy wrote: post #36
stevefeinstein wrote: post #24

I think tis is a step in the right direction, but I can't help but think that raising the floor still leaves people there on the floor. Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?

That's what I imagine happening too. $1K a month sounds great until inflation renders it equivalent to $100 a month. Perhaps it could be adjusted for inflation in some way.

I'd hope you'd tie it to inflation, but that only helps so much if the rate of inflation it's tied to is even slightly "off" (say, by a tenth of a percent), and then you compound it annually...
Post reply on HN