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

Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 251 posts

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#101

Post by theandrewbailey »

witty_username wrote: post #45
jbob2000 wrote: post #28

Something that is missing from the basic income/poverty debate is the notion of "learned helplessness"; after a long time in poverty, people get used to the lifestyle and have difficulty adjusting to "regular" life. For example, if you've been homeless your entire life, you've never had to lock your apartment door or carry a key around. My partner (a social worker) had a client who's apartment was always getting robb…

Basic income doesn't solve any of this. It just drops a load of money into a person's lap who has no idea what to do with it. What do you mean by this? Poor people would definitely know what to do with it.

They might know what to do with it. They might also spend it all on drugs, or fall prey to scammers or thieves.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#102

Post by cat_plus_plus »

fixermark wrote: post #73
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #51

This is nuts. Basic income is not to provide extra spending money for 100% of americans. It's help 10% of the most poor while everyone else ends up paying back the money in taxes. So we are talking about 300 billion. This is half of US military budget and will be instead of, instead of in addition to, current aid programs. It is true that basic income will not directly improve lifestyle of the middle class. It can we…

One of the points the author proffers is that displacing more targeted, conditional aid with UBI may not actually be better. The question of whether---if you just give people money---they spend it wisely enough to maintain their needs is an open question. It's sort of the formalized version of "Don't give that wino a dollar; he's just going to spend it on more booze." (The sense I get is economists lean towards "Yes,…

So just give money in small daily deposits. If someone spends all money in beer one day, he/she will be hungry the next day and make better choices.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#103

Post by tracker1 »

refurb wrote: post #59
RamshackleJ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, and it doesn't even bother talking about the $21–32tn of untaxed assets( http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/upload/pdf/Price_of_Offshore_R... ). Or that we tax the rich too little while we tax everyone else too much to keep public perception focused on taxes being too high( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_Marginal_... ).

Or that we tax the rich too little The top 3% of income earners pay 51% of all income taxes.[1] You think that's too little? What should that number be? [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-...

Or, we could revise corporate and capital gains taxes, tax currency exchanges out of the country, and then tax everyone at 50%... from there, that would be enough for a "basic income" where everyone is taxed the same on what they earn.

I don't think corporate taxes work, what's needed is systems and taxes in place to encourage keeping money more local, as well as diversifying or paying out dividends, which would in turn be taxed (assuming adjustments in capital gains). I'd just assume get rid of corporate taxes with the above adjustments and also get rid of corporate personhood and significant campaign reform.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#104

Post by grahamburger »

sharemywin wrote: post #31
lossolo wrote: post #25

Problem is with capitalism and it's founders that told us all that you can't live without work. In next decades we will need to change the system diametrical because robots will take all not creative jobs out there. If we want basic pay we will need to tax corporations that use robots at around 70-90%, money from tax will go for basic pay, money from people that receive basic pay will go to corporations etc. Thing th…

maybe people should start owning the robots.

I remember thinking this as a kid. "Just make it illegal for a corporation to own a robot, each person only owns one robot and they keep the value it generates." Thought I'd solved the problem ;)

I think the reality is that it's not really a 'robot' in the sci-fi sense - it's a thousand automated machines doing one tiny piece of the process, and slowly your factory with 500 employees only needs 5, and output and quality have increased. There isn't really a single robot to 'own', and even there was it would be far too expensive for one regular person to own it.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#105

Post by refurb »

drewrv wrote: post #94
refurb wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or that we tax the rich too little The top 3% of income earners pay 51% of all income taxes.[1] You think that's too little? What should that number be? [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-...

I think Buffet should pay a higher tax rate than his secretary. http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secreta... And I think Mitt Romney should pay a higher rate than me. http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/21/pf/taxes/romney-tax-return/ The problem is that we treat capital gains differently than we treat income. Most of the top 3% work and pay income taxes, but the top .1% don't really pay income tax.

Are you proposing we eliminate the charitable tax deduction? That's one of the main drivers of Romney's low rate.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#106

Post by mason240 »

tomp wrote: post #80
refurb wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not the other just by the virtue of their birth What makes you think most land is owned through birthright? Any stats to back that up? I would assume most land was purchased. And if you levy a big tax on property, be prepared for the value of that property to drop dramatically. Money flows freely from one asset to another. If land becomes unattractive, those dollars will just go elsewhere.

> What makes you think most land is owned through birthright? Any stats to back that up? I would assume most land was purchased. Purchased from whom? I would imagine a lot of land in the most desirable locations (cities etc) are owned by private individuals or family trusts/companies, so they have been/will be inherited (even if the owners change in between). And if it's owned by a corporation, I guess the same logic…

So no actual stats, just your gut feelings about how you think things work.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#107

Post by refurb »

tomp wrote: post #80
refurb wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not the other just by the virtue of their birth What makes you think most land is owned through birthright? Any stats to back that up? I would assume most land was purchased. And if you levy a big tax on property, be prepared for the value of that property to drop dramatically. Money flows freely from one asset to another. If land becomes unattractive, those dollars will just go elsewhere.

> What makes you think most land is owned through birthright? Any stats to back that up? I would assume most land was purchased. Purchased from whom? I would imagine a lot of land in the most desirable locations (cities etc) are owned by private individuals or family trusts/companies, so they have been/will be inherited (even if the owners change in between). And if it's owned by a corporation, I guess the same logic…

Living on a piece of land is rent seeking? I don't think you know what that word means.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#108

Post by boxy310 »

lossolo wrote: post #25

Problem is with capitalism and it's founders that told us all that you can't live without work. In next decades we will need to change the system diametrical because robots will take all not creative jobs out there. If we want basic pay we will need to tax corporations that use robots at around 70-90%, money from tax will go for basic pay, money from people that receive basic pay will go to corporations etc. Thing th…

Rentier classes clearly do live without work, it's largely a question of how large of a population can live without working. If the fundamental tension in Marxist theory is real, then one could argue that a UBI is insurance against a populist uprising demanding a living wage.

Religion might have been the opiate of the masses in the past, but if price stability with a dole is feasible then I can guarantee you there's going to be a significant share of the population who wants to do nothing but sit around and engage in idle socializing, sports, or art.

Provided that there's also still a differential for working, then people will still chase after prestige but not be threatened by destitution if they choose a sub-optimal career path.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#109

Post by Jtsummers »

dionidium wrote: post #84
Jtsummers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Poverty is an issue long solved in the USA. When? How? EDIT: While I disagree with the parent poster, primarily because I've seen plenty of homeless, underemployed, malnourished individuals in my travels around the US my entire life, and no significant decline in the past several years, my questions were not meant entirely sarcastically. If poverty is solved, explain how or by what measure you consider it to be sol…

The grandparent's POV is a pretty common one. Just about anybody can get a job making minimum wage, which will bring home at least (7.25 × 40) × 4 = $1,160 each month (more in some places). That is enough money in most places to rent a basic apartment and buy plenty of food to eat. Plenty of people in that bracket also have cable TV and a car and a smart phone. It's not easy and it's not all that much fun , but you'r…

Which isn't actually a solution, we still need to connect people to those jobs somehow. Many people live in areas where those jobs simply aren't available. I drive through those towns all the time. There's insufficient money invested in the area in other businesses to offer a middle class that can support a lower class making minimum wage.

These people need to move, which is a non-trivial cost. There's no guarantee they'll get a job when they go to, say, Atlanta. And they'll be paying more in rent or living in even worse living conditions (crammed into small apartments with more people). They'd be giving up their connections to family and friends and a community that they've been a part of.

The problem of poverty will only be solved when no one is in poverty for any reason but choice. Calling it solved because technically there may be enough minimum wage jobs for everyone is the same as saying hunger is solved because technically there's enough food for everyone.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#110

Post by refurb »

drabiega wrote: post #89
refurb wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or that we tax the rich too little The top 3% of income earners pay 51% of all income taxes.[1] You think that's too little? What should that number be? [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-...

Not sure that is a relevant measure. Those people will also be paying a relatively low percentage of their income to taxes overall thanks to taxes which are flat or capped, so I'm not sure why it's meaningful what percent of tax revenues they contribute. As an admittedly extreme example, if the population consisted of 100 people who make 2$ and pay 1$, and one guy who makes $1000 and pays $100, he's responsible for h…

Well, considering ~40% of Americans pay no income tax, I'd say the top is paying more than their fair share?
Post reply on HN