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

Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 413 posts

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#231

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Dagwoodie wrote: post #194
CydeWeys wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Progressive taxation is more fair from the standpoint of society at large. You're being myopic in only considering it from your point of view. How is it "fair" to force someone who is barely making ends meet and struggles to sometimes put food on the table to pay the same exact tax rate as someone who is rich, and whose biggest economic struggle is wondering whether to upgrade to a bigger yacht this year or next year…

The poor person isn't paying Yacht tax, country club tax, box seats tax, Porsche tax.

Not directly, but usually their labour is generating the value that produces the income that gets transferred to the rich person (eg via return on capital) allowing the payment for luxuries and the taxes on them (though more usually, it seems, the costs of avoiding said taxes).

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#232

Post by awqrre »

jganetsk wrote: post #182

I agree with basic income, but most analyses of it are backwards. For most of history, governments addressed unemployment by starting wars. By shipping off to war, the unemployed temporarily get a job. They either come back dead or ready to take a new job in an economy revitalized by the stimulus of government war spending. John Maynard Keynes noticed this pattern, especially during the Great Depression and WW2, and…

100% automation is not here yet... we are probably at 25% (my very rough estimate)

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#233

Post by mjevans »

agumonkey wrote: post #119
kLeeIsDead wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no acceptable limit. It should be for life, or longer.

A test is a test is a test.

However this test is not testing the actual idea of UBI.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#234

Post by transposed »

throwaway729 wrote: post #190
sonthonax wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negative income tax would be a blatant subsidisation of labour, which has it's own issues. In another sense, it's just welfare, but a highly regressive one. More income would go to those who are poor but in work, and less to those for what ever reason (like disability) unable to work. If you were to further lower the costs of labour, you risk stymieing actual economic growth which comes from improvements in efficienc…

> For instance, why use a machine when you can just hire more people? Politics could become a reason -- the people who are being replaced by machines become a powerful force, have a strong work-based ethic (different from "work ethic"), and care more about their well-being than the overall efficiency of the economy.

Interesting point, I had not considered that.

Either way, I'm curious to see more adoption of UBI - even if it is a small, homogeneous population. Maybe working class beneficiaries of UBI could dedicate a larger portion of their time to volunteering, or re-training.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#235

Post by Futurebot »

TheProbabilist wrote: post #227
IgorPartola wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a society produces so much value that everyone can be provided with a basic income that is greater than cost of living, why is that a bad thing?

I'm positive that this answer won't be appetizing if you belong to the dyed in the wool, coastal progressive contingent, heavily represented here on HN. Given the recent political developments (not just here in the U.S. but across the world including Europe), it is high time we speak frankly and not say things couched in vain pleasantries, suited to people who'd rather not hear or say anything disagreeable, to keep u…

An actual UBI (which this isn't) is by definition universal. Everyone gets it regardless of income or whether or not they work.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#236

Post by DalekBaldwin »

omash wrote: post #117
rhapsodic wrote: post #15

I want to be on record here. Today, December 17, 2016, I predict that this will fail. And by "fail", I mean that this will not become a universal entitlement in Finland.

Of course this "test" will fail, they're giving it to a group of people who already have a specific state of employment. It won't be seen as a safety net to follow their ambition because of its temporary, non-universal nature. It might make sense for them to hoard the cash until the test is over or spend it lavishly as a temporary reprieve from poverty. I hope this won't create material to make a case against basic i…

> It won't be seen as a safety net to follow their ambition

Well then, a basic income only given to the ambitious wouldn't be a universal basic income, would it?

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#237

Post by fpp »

From a first cross-read, this article is bluntly discrediting UBI.

Starting with numbers: about 204M working age population in the US - hence the USD10K to each of them example would just make somewhere what is spend yearly for military and banks - the 8 times numbers cited in the article of what is spent today does not make any sense.

The linked article does not mention any amounts that Finland wants to provide to the 2k people - instead it is referring to Swiss calculations - last numbers I've heard with Finland were on par with current social security / poverty level pays (~EUR600 p/m) - this of course does not enable most of the key effects intended with an UBI (money into spending, freedom of choice for work etc) - it only continues the current system (with some potential savings within the administration).

To get a better understanding we have to at least repeat the Canadian experiments from the 1920s (proven that it is substantially beneficiary for the economy overall) - more money than poverty level, people must gain freedom by the possibility to live.

Given that soon a large proportion of people will not have a chance to find a job that will allow them to survive, we either go back to lords and serfs or actually look into potentially sustainable solutions.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#238

Post by reddytowns »

astigsen wrote: post #223
reddytowns wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And there is nothing stopping a group of people right now from forming up and, enforced by contract, giving basic income to all members by taxing those that make money. If it were such a great idea for a country, it would have already occurred at a smaller level.

> If it were such a great idea for a country, it would have already occurred at a smaller level. It has. The Svanholm community in Denmark ( http://svanholm.dk ) raised taxes to 80% for all its members, but in return you free housing, food and all other essentials. They have been doing this successfully since the 70's.

I don't understand Danish, but using Google translate, this looks like straight up communism.

Also, from the english translation: https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?act=url&...

"It requires personal energy, commitment and desire for self-management in the community to become Svanholmer. Both people with work "out of town" and people who want to work at home on the estate can participate."

This doesn't sound like they just hand out money, and seems likely (I'm just guessing here), that if you don't work you may get kicked out.

This all in all seems a lot different than UBI.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#239

Post by oceante »

TheProbabilist wrote: post #227
IgorPartola wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a society produces so much value that everyone can be provided with a basic income that is greater than cost of living, why is that a bad thing?

I'm positive that this answer won't be appetizing if you belong to the dyed in the wool, coastal progressive contingent, heavily represented here on HN. Given the recent political developments (not just here in the U.S. but across the world including Europe), it is high time we speak frankly and not say things couched in vain pleasantries, suited to people who'd rather not hear or say anything disagreeable, to keep u…

Your comment is distinctly American.

The rest of the world is perfectly happy with universal healthcare, strong social safety nets, and "handouts" to children.

How do you think Brexit was sold to the British? Do you realize that the Brexiters (and all the European nativists) have been selling their agenda primarily on the basis that it would mean more handouts?

America is different. And we all know what that difference is. Americans are very much unique in rejecting basic social guarantees out of the fear that the "wrong people" will benefit.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#240

Post by Gustomaximus »

nradov wrote: post #157

Instead of just giving people money our governments at federal / state / local levels should become employers of last resort for everyone who has exhausted their welfare or unemployment benefits. Guarantee 30 hours / week at minimum wage to anyone who wants to work. Even if it's just trail maintenance or graffiti cleanup they will at least be maintaining basic employment skills, and have enough spare time to retrain…

This is what I really support, but would take it a step further. I feel the problem is so many countries have this poverty line unemployment payments as a once size fits all. I think we should break support into 3 categories.

1) for the immediately unemployed that have had a history of paying tax, give them generous payment coverage between jobs for a 3-6 month window type thing. Something like 60% of their pay.

2) after said time window, if no unemployment is found you are given guaranteed 30 hours (or whatever is right) work at minimum wage in areas that are as non competing the the economy as possible. E.g. Beautifying the city or helping seniors etc.

3) if you refuse to take minimum wage work you can get a set amount of food and basic accomodation to keep you from beng homeless/starving.

From point 2, as automation becomes more prevalent and effective the number of hours worked can be reduced to match this progress.

Post reply on HN