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

Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

igmchicago.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–126 of 126 posts

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#121

Post by PCMcGee »

ncallaway wrote: post #101
jcizzle wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you can go make your society where the only thing that matters is that people believe the same thing. And then I'll live in current society, where people put forth an effort to support that society's needs. And then we can figure out which one gets to define society based on which one survives long enough to write down the definition. (Also, wouldn't a society imply exclusion by its very definition?)

I'll point out that if you're arguing that the surviving society gets to make the definition, then the definitions I presented are backed by society (Wikipedia, Google, Dictionary.com), whereas the definition you have proposed is your own.

And don't overlook the fact that the society he is presenting is destroying the only place where any other society could be built, namely The Earth.

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#122

Post by PCMcGee »

jcizzle wrote: post #60
vkou wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of work does little to benefit society. It is a collaborative effort to enrich your employer.

That is a viewpoint that ignores the level at which humans, especially in the US, live at. The amount of work and people that goes into having convenient access to food, transportation and clean water is incredible. And those are just basic needs that we take for granted. Your employer creates good and services that people consume, therefore, the work enriches society. If your short-sightedness only extends to the po…

The level most people in the US live at is called "poverty". The amount of work that goes into food, transportation and clean water is incredibly small, compared to the amount of people it supports, and it could be made immensely more efficient if we weren't using technology that is 100 years old. The only thing a market creates is blind demand for more useless crap, while destroying the very firmament on which it operates. This libertarian "belief" in the benefits of markets is utterly contradicted by scientific evidence which shows that capitalism is the force that is destroying our environment, while extenuating the inequality between the rent-seeking and the rent-paying. I'm sure your dad taught you to "work hard", but we don't live in the forest anymore. It's time for you to educate yourself about what would be beneficial for society as a whole, rather than believing in adages that (shockingly) uphold and entrench the advantages you have inherited from your birthplace and skin color.

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#123

Post by RangerScience »

natrius wrote: post #66
RangerScience wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A portion of those people will make their own jobs. Most of that portion are some form of artist - I know dancers, leatherworkers, acrobats, and event planners that would readily go after UBI - although what's interesting is that al those people already DO have jobs, just not the ones they want, or that pay the bills well enough.

Underpaid people who are pursing their passions will be fine with a UBI. People who lose their jobs to machines will have to rebuild their idea of why their life has value from scratch, and a UBI makes it clear that other people are still creating lots of value in the world—enough to fund checks for you. Lots of people don't have productive passions. They were focused on being valuable to their family and community i…

This is an extremely good point.

Adaptation, classification, a change in how people define themselves?

You point out what I think would end up being a rough patch, but one worth going through.

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#124

Post by runin2k1 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #116
runin2k1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no "apalmer", but have a similar perspective... From a simple supply and demand standpoint, how does the extra income introduced not simply cause the cost of basic * goods to rise accordingly such that you end up with your UBI increasingly falling behind what is needed to support a minimum standard of living? * Added "basic" for clarity, I don't imagine this would affect the cost of luxury, or recreational goods…

In a closed system, it would. But if a US citizen can move to a location where not everyone gets the US basic income, then their basic income will be worth something.

Like Baja! I'm in!

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#125

Post by stcredzero »

PCMcGee wrote: post #118
stcredzero wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that the way you expressed it, essentially the only way to contribute to society is by working a job. Note the way I expressed it, the emphasis is on contributing . Your particular spin strikes me as an eagerness to oppose a particular POV, then you go on to project that POV onto me. I don't thrive as well when contributing as a volunteer, which I did when under employed, as when I have a full time job. Keep in…

"Most of the jobs constituting valuable contributions are going to be paid" This is not the way things are. This sounds more like something a politician told you to believe. The most valuable workers in our economy are underpaid (farm workers, waitresses, teachers, etc.), if they aren't totally voluntary already. (parents and caregivers) In truth, when everyone has to make an income to survive, it instills a type of…

The most valuable workers in our economy are underpaid (farm workers, waitresses, teachers, etc.), if they aren't totally voluntary already. (parents and caregivers)

Your analysis is fatally flawed from this point. Teachers are valuable, and I feel they should be full-on professionals paid like we pay coders. Farm Workers and Wait Staff could be valuable, depending on what level of skill, diligence, and expertise they bring. Those two categories cover a very broad range of levels of expertise.

Parents and caregivers didn't start out as a part of the economic system. They also don't necessarily have to be paid. It has been noted that paying people to do what they'd do for free often has well known pathologies associated with it.

This type of motivation is what leads impoverished South Americans to destroy the largest rainforest on Earth, or African children to work in gold mines exposed to toxic mercury, dragline fisherman to deplete great oceans full of life, the list is endless.

This only shows that our world has incentives that are sometimes way out of whack. It doesn't then follow that the answer is basic income. Other societies have tried "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" with following drops in productivity.

Re: Universal Basic Income – Poll Results from IGM Economic Experts Panel

#126

Post by Retric »

wang_li wrote: post #23
Retric wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A flater tax rate would make up a large chunk of the difference. Basicly, at 50k you still get UBI, but it's offset by new taxes to leave your after tax income more or less the same. At 25k, you pay a lot more in taxes, but get a UBI for a net gain. At 0k you just get UBI, not food stamps ect. There would probably be a net cost increase, but as SS counts as regular income it's not going to be huge for most retires. A…

I thought the U stood for universal. If you take it back in new taxes, it's just a transfer program from productive to non-productive.

So is prison, social security, food stamps etc. considering we have a very large and expensive system it's worth looking into improvements.
Post reply on HN