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

Enough with Basic Income

salon.thefamily.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 214 posts

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#141

Post by andrenth »

kmkemp wrote: post #121
zaguios wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I am not familiar with the job situation in France so I was basing the sentence on this quote from the article "Second, it has often been blamed for providing an incentive to give up looking for a job". It sounds like whether or not the statement is true as you mentioned basic income still provides an overall benefit.

UBI doesn't disincentivize work. If I told you that I would give you $10k/year unconditionally, would you quit your day job? What if you were currently unemployed, would you stop looking for a job? There is no reason to as my payment to you doesn't depend on if you get a job or not.

If you give everyone $1000 a month (to round the numbers) now the work of someone who makes $1200 a month is only worth $200 (as one can make $1000 just by idling). Would this person want to work for $200 a month?

This is a major disincentive of work.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#142

Post by Nicolas_Colin »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #116
Nicolas_Colin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your response. I wrote this article because it seems to me the basic income discussion is orchestrated by people, notably in technology, who are unaware of politics and reluctant to get their hands dirty. I know that UBI, on paper, looks like it’s a good answer to many of the challenges listed at the end. But I don’t think that UBI, once put in place, would be as strong, politically, as other universal…

> Round #2: left-wing government loses elections, new right-wing government decides to target UBI on the poor in order to master the costs. UBI becomes BI without the "U". The flaw here is that this would seem to apply to any form of social assistance. Why hasn't the same thing happened to social security? The answer is that Round #2 doesn't make sense. You can't take someone who is making $60K/year + $10K UBI and ta…

The dynamic (converting universal benefits into means-tested benefits) happened 2 years ago in France with universal childcare benefits ("allocations familiales"). It's true that people weren't happy, but the pressure in favor of austerity was just too much and it was implemented very gradually.

It hasn't happened to Social Security because, if I'm not mistaken, the pension amount is proportional to what you earned during your career => hence the rich pay more but also receive more. Same with unemployment benefits.

This is actually the only way to make a universal monetary benefit politically sustainable. And UBI, with its fixed amount, doesn't match that criteria.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#143

Post by Nicolas_Colin »

aconz2 wrote: post #122
Nicolas_Colin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your response. I wrote this article because it seems to me the basic income discussion is orchestrated by people, notably in technology, who are unaware of politics and reluctant to get their hands dirty. I know that UBI, on paper, looks like it’s a good answer to many of the challenges listed at the end. But I don’t think that UBI, once put in place, would be as strong, politically, as other universal…

> I wrote this article because it seems to me the basic income discussion is orchestrated by people, notably in technology, who are unaware of politics and reluctant to get their hands dirty. While I myself am a programmer and support basic income, I have talked with many people outside the technology world who are also in favor of such a system. YC is getting their hands dirty with their research project and Finland…

Actually, talking is not the only way. Were 19th century factory workers content with talking? No: they initiated the labor movement and conquered the modern social state.

The fact that so many people talk about BI without leaving their job, raising funds, going on strike, founding unions, etc., is proof in my eyes that we're having an intellectual discussion, not waging a political battle.

The one precedent of authentic political action in the current context, the foundation of the Freelancers Union, was meant to fight for health coverage for freelancers, not a monetary benefit.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#144

Post by Nicolas_Colin »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #114
Nicolas_Colin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your response. I wrote this article because it seems to me the basic income discussion is orchestrated by people, notably in technology, who are unaware of politics and reluctant to get their hands dirty. I know that UBI, on paper, looks like it’s a good answer to many of the challenges listed at the end. But I don’t think that UBI, once put in place, would be as strong, politically, as other universal…

Perhaps I missed it but one large advantage of badic income is 1: not means tested—losing benefits because you found a better job is a huge problem with current systems. I know from first hand experience as I went through school. 2: Universal and free market oriented. You are not told how to spend that income and you can then use it to support small business/entrepreneurial endeavors.

It's true, but those two arguments exist only on paper.

In practice, my guess is that it wouldn't be long before UBI is converted a means-tested benefit, for both financial and political reasons.

As for advantage number 2, yes you're not told how to spend that income but chances are that income is far from enough to pay for proper healthcare / childcare / elderly care or well-located housing.

The history of the social state shows us that transferring money to people is not enough: you also have to supplement the market and correct its imperfections.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#145

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #116
Nicolas_Colin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your response. I wrote this article because it seems to me the basic income discussion is orchestrated by people, notably in technology, who are unaware of politics and reluctant to get their hands dirty. I know that UBI, on paper, looks like it’s a good answer to many of the challenges listed at the end. But I don’t think that UBI, once put in place, would be as strong, politically, as other universal…

> Round #2: left-wing government loses elections, new right-wing government decides to target UBI on the poor in order to master the costs. UBI becomes BI without the "U". The flaw here is that this would seem to apply to any form of social assistance. Why hasn't the same thing happened to social security? The answer is that Round #2 doesn't make sense. You can't take someone who is making $60K/year + $10K UBI and ta…

> Why hasn't the same thing happened to social security

I think the reason that social security survives while welfare benefits continue to be slashed regularly is perfectly clear.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#146

Post by carapace »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #113
SmellTheGlove wrote: post #2

There are some good points in here. However, what I think the author misses is that we are within reach of a post-scarcity economy, at which point all of those historical economic references go out the window (since nearly all economic theory assumes scarcity). That possibility makes a UBI experiment very worthwhile to me. I don't think we're there today or anything like that, but it may be within our lifetimes that…

Post-scarcity while a nice idea is something that will never be reached. All we have to do is look a Maslow's hierarchy of needs( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs ) there are no absolutes there only relatives. You can never fulfill relative needs for all. Here's a very simple example. We can make a very strong argument that we've reached a very high mark on safety. We live in a society that…

Well, that's the question facing us, in the large: Do we create artificial scarcity to keep our bullshit going? Or do we, as a species, learn to relax and stop effing with each other?

We had to hit each other with sharp bits of metal for a long time. We don't have to do that anymore. Do we notice or not?

Bucky Fuller pointed out that, in terms of our technical ability, post-scarcity arrived in the seventies. We can call it with the invention of the microprocessor. (We don't need to postulate fusion, as there is already a serviceable fusion reactor available nearby: it's that thing in the sky that burns your eyes when you look at it.)

Let me repeat that because it bears emphasis: We are already in a post-scarcity condition.

Put another way, all our problems now are psychological. Which is kind of what you were saying, or not?

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#147

Post by caente »

andrenth wrote: post #141
kmkemp wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI doesn't disincentivize work. If I told you that I would give you $10k/year unconditionally, would you quit your day job? What if you were currently unemployed, would you stop looking for a job? There is no reason to as my payment to you doesn't depend on if you get a job or not.

If you give everyone $1000 a month (to round the numbers) now the work of someone who makes $1200 a month is only worth $200 (as one can make $1000 just by idling). Would this person want to work for $200 a month? This is a major disincentive of work.

So what? If the person has no reason to work, then they shouldn't. Humans are entrepreneurial by nature. Everybody has crazy dreams that have long forgotten because they needed to eat. I don't even want UBI so people don't starve, I'd like UBI so people can live comfortably without having to work. Everybody should feel "rich", the same way most silicon valley kids do/are.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#148

Post by carapace »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #12
SmellTheGlove wrote: post #2

There are some good points in here. However, what I think the author misses is that we are within reach of a post-scarcity economy, at which point all of those historical economic references go out the window (since nearly all economic theory assumes scarcity). That possibility makes a UBI experiment very worthwhile to me. I don't think we're there today or anything like that, but it may be within our lifetimes that…

There will be no post-scarcity economy, or rather, if there is one, we're already living in it. People like to trade stuff. This means there will always be things people want to trade. This means money, commerce, and scarcity aren't going anywhere. The post-scarcity folks seem to assume that there is some basic set of things: food, shelter, healthcare ... that once we have, we'll be "done" It's never going to work th…

The point is that our problems are shifting from physical ("How do we eat?") to psychological ("Where shall we have lunch?").

I've heard it said that, "even God hesitates to offer anything but bread to the starving man."

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#149

Post by inflagranti »

geezerjay wrote: post #98
inflagranti wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike which other entities exactly that are not made by people!? I guess you mean private companies which are always well run (how many banks had to be bailed out?), never susceptible to corruption (VW comes to mind just recently) and offer great customer service (any cable company ever)...

> Unlike which other entities exactly that are not made by people!? You've missed the point. The point is that the foundation of the basic income concept is that the income redistribution scheme works flawlessly and according to the people's expectations. This assumption is patently false, as the system is established and managed by people, particularly elected officials and the regime's apparatchiks, who have a long…

Maybe that was his point, it was absolutely not what he wrote though. I won't contest that any redistribution scheme will not work flawlessly, but nor will anything else! So if the argument is, it won't work because it's run by people, that's just silly, as any alternative will have the same 'limitation'.

Now again, the fact that there is corruption in many countries and money is used wrongly simply means there might be initial or additional work be done, but it definitely does not mean it's inherently not possible, there are plenty of government with low corruption, too.

Finally, what's the alternative? Let the market work and private companies, which I highlighted have the exact same flaws as the government, possibly just on a smaller scale!?

Just putting our heads in the sand and saying this will never work is not a way forward, unless you think of course there's no problem in the first place.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#150

Post by Nicolas_Colin »

geomark wrote: post #3

FTA "...we have long known that technology destroys jobs..." Should I even bother to continue reading after that? After all, what we actually know is that technology creates jobs, like the ones that I and a large number of people I know have had.

I wrote the article so I hope you'll continue reading :-)

Technology destroys some jobs and it creates others, but those new jobs are numerous enough only if we put in place the right institutions (sustainable and inclusive). We're not there yet (and I don't see UBI as one of those).

This is an older article about job destruction and job creation: https://salon.thefamily.co/another-100-days-a-digital-new-de...

Post reply on HN