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

131–140 of 251 posts

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#131

Post by Lawtonfogle »

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…

The top 3% do pay their fair share. More than their fair share really. It is the .1% or even .01% that draw far more from society than they pay.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#132

Post by drewrv »

refurb wrote: post #105
drewrv wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Perhaps my comment wasn't clear enough: I'm proposing we treat capital gains as income. From the article on Romney:

"The reason Romney's rate is so low -- despite having one of the highest incomes in the country -- is because his income was derived almost entirely from capital gains and dividends from his extensive portfolio of investments. And that form of investment income is typically taxed at just 15%, well below the 35% top tax rate for high earners."

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#133

Post by Jtsummers »

tn13 wrote: post #127
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…

homeless, underemployed and malnourished etc. in USA are far better than Homeless, Underemployed and Malnourished 50 years ago and even the lower middle class in the rest of the world. I would prefer to be a homeless in USA than lower middle class in India.

That doesn't make poverty solved. That means we've improved the lot for many people, but we haven't solved the problems of poverty. They're still homeless. They're still underemployed/unemployed. They're still malnourished.

When those are consequences of anything but rational, healthy, deliberate choice [0], or very temporary circumstances, then poverty is not solved.

[0] Which pretty much means religious/cultural reasons. The rationality of those choices are still debatable, but they aren't predicated on mental or physical illness.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#134

Post by grahamburger »

sharemywin wrote: post #114
grahamburger wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 qual…

why not own part of one. of course I think the world will reorganize into 3 markets managed by blockchains/oracles: equipment rental, labor/services market, attention market.

Would owning a part of the 'robot' be intrinsically different that owning a part of the corporation that owns the robot? Ownership in the companies that we work for is nice, but for most of us it's not enough to live on.

We could intentionally try to make automating more expensive so that companies just don't do it. The problem is automating is actually great for everyone else - as a consumer I'd rather buy a car that is better made, safer, and cheaper from an automated factory than one that might be prone to human error and is more expensive.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#135

Post by jbattle »

Smudge wrote: post #77
jbob2000 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you heard some of these stories, you would find that it's not just a lack of money that causes homelessness. To be brutally honest, it's a mixture of stupidity and often, an addiction. These people need other people actively intervening in their lives to keep them on track. The preventative measure should be the social worker, not the pay cheque.

I think the operating word is "some," not all. We know that UBI will sometimes be misspent. Most if not all aid programs have this problem. That doesn't mean it isn't worth it for those who would put the money to good use.

It's a problem if the math behind UBI presumes savings from eliminating a ton of social programs and we later find that there are substantial numbers of people that still need those programs even with UBI for non-financial reasons.

If we find that non-trivial numbers of parents blow all their UBI on XYZ, are we really going to let their kids starve? Or will we see that programs like SNAP need to remain in existence?

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#136

Post by drabiega »

newacct23 wrote: post #17
nullsmack wrote: post #6

The very first argument in the article is flawed which leads me to wonder how much of it is or isn't flawed. It talks about a Universal Basic Income for everyone over 21.. then it complains that would cost 3 trillion dollars for all of the 300 million Americans. According to the Census Bureau as of 2015 there were 321 million Americans and 24% were under 18. No clue how many were under 21. But that still takes it dow…

You are arguing about specifics that do not make any difference to the overall argument the author is trying to make. UBI for 244 million is still unfeasible. UBI is just a bad idea, jobs in themselves have nice externalities that UBI wont give. People that have jobs generally don't commit crimes. Also a UBI will disincentivize working jobs that are undesirable but are necessary for a functioning society.

Look, this straw man has been beaten to death. I don't think anyone who has seriously considered UBI is arguing that all working age people should have +${UBI_AMOUNT} extra dollars. Most people would have extra taxes roughly equal to their income from UBI.

If you want to argue against redistribution, then do so, but don't throw out this we can't afford it lame horse anymore.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#137

Post by SkyMarshal »

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…

If basic income were implemented society-wide it might prevent learned helplessness from happening in the first place. Assume you start receiving BI at 18, then you never fall to a level of poverty so low that that degree of learned helplessness sets in.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#138

Post by kefka »

refurb wrote: post #110
drabiega wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Because total tax expenditures are far from just income tax. There's property taxes, vehicle taxes, gas taxes, "christian sin" taxes, lottery (which is a tax on stupid people), social security tax, medicare tax, sales tax, specific item/service sales tax, city taxes, county option taxes.

And that's not even remotely the amount of taxes on businesses that raise the price of goods secretly to compensate the taxes hidden.

And also, even illegal immigrants pay these taxes. They aren't even exempt. And many use fraudulent SSNs, so taxes are taken an applied to those SS accounts, but the illegals never use them. Yet more money for the coffers.

But some percentage isn't paying any of one specific tax.

Whatever.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#139

Post by marxidad »

carapace wrote: post #44
toomuchtodo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also a UBI will disincentivize working jobs that are undesirable but are necessary for a functioning society. That's kinda the point. You drive up the cost of undesirable jobs until you find someone who'll work it. If no one wants to work it, you'll need to automate it or do without.

Yes, this! I hate the "But who will pick up the garbage?" argument so much, the lazy thinker who says this is implying that our society only functions if there's an explicit hell waiting for those who fail it. And that's kinda fucked up, eh? If UBI fixed just that it would be worth it, IMHO. Also, have you ever talked to the people who pick up your garbage?

Another option is that people deal with their own garbage and maybe learn to reduce and re-use and demand less packaging.

Re: Why a Universal Basic Income Will Not Solve Poverty

#140

Post by [deleted] »

refurb wrote: post #110
drabiega wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN