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

Why we should all have a basic income

weforum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 492 posts

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#131

Post by cpursley »

cpursley wrote: post #126

I have a serious question for folks who support UBI: what is stopping you from getting started now and helping your neighbors? Why not just cut out the middle-man (government bureaucracy) and provide someone with a monthly income from your own pocket? This could be accomplished by individuals with high income (like many here), or by voluntarily pooling your money together.

And before downvoting me, this is what ycombinator is trying at a private institutional level: https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income/

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#132

Post by nine_k »

funkyy wrote: post #94

Automation will not reduce overall jobs same way industrialization did not do that. Automation will create more jobs in services instead. Basic income is crazy socialist dream that was tested in communism already and it failed.

You mean, industrialization did not create a crazy amount of jobs on factories?

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#133

Post by skybrian »

spork12 wrote: post #98

It would work for a certain period of time until inflation catches up. You could keep raising the basic income to keep pace, but it would require raising it more every time and sooner than the last time (exponential). Inflation can be quite damaging because not everything inflates at the same rate. For example salaries are pretty slow to inflate compared to the prices for things like gas or food. This is why a mason…

Inflation comes from too much money chasing too few goods. How it works is different in each market. Real estate in big cities is supply-constrained but many other goods and services aren't, given time to adjust.

In particular, there's little reason to believe that basic income would be bad for Walmart. They'd sell more and their workers would be better off.

There's no reason for price controls and they wouldn't help.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#134

Post by lemmsjid »

funkyy wrote: post #94

Automation will not reduce overall jobs same way industrialization did not do that. Automation will create more jobs in services instead. Basic income is crazy socialist dream that was tested in communism already and it failed.

Basic income is very different than traditional communism in that it keeps with the basic capitalist infrastructure.

In fact, basic income is much more capitalistic than existing social safety net systems because it maintains the assumption that if disadvantaged people are actors in the market, that the overall system will be more efficient than specific government-specified handouts.

Really the question underlying basic income and safety nets in general is to what extent every citizen in a modern society should have access to goods, regardless of their contribution. Once society has decided how much access such citizens should have, welfare vs basic income becomes a question of efficiency and optimization as opposed to ideology.

As for automation not reducing overall jobs--as someone who works in automation I don't see how it will magically create more service jobs. There are few jobs today that employ large numbers of people that are not in danger of being replaced by automation--and the whole point of automation and efficiency is to minimize the number of people required to maintain the system. I do think service jobs become the way people become gainfully employed in an automation world, but that society will need to expand its definition of what is a job worthy of recompense--for example someone could decide to become an artist, and actually have that be a renumerative profession.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#135

Post by andosa »

funkyy wrote: post #94

Automation will not reduce overall jobs same way industrialization did not do that. Automation will create more jobs in services instead. Basic income is crazy socialist dream that was tested in communism already and it failed.

You assume that robots/algorithms will never be as good at some jobs as a worker with median abilities. This is a very strong (and likely wrong in the long term) assumption to make.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#136

Post by holograham »

yagga wrote: post #73
jarym wrote: post #54

Funny how all the proponents of a Universal 'Basic' Income aren't proposing instead to make every 'Basic' item 'Free'. After all, if you believe their rhetoric, giving someone $500/mo should be the same as giving them free bread, eggs, milk, some clothes and some movie tickets. I wonder why... Maybe, the reality is that over time our 'Basic' needs increase. In certain parts of the world shoes are still considered a l…

Wise words. We do need a better way to measure value people create. For example, many geniuses (inventors, thinkers, etc) who do not have business skills live poor while creating more value than many CEOs that can manage, negotiate, raise funds, have connections, etc. Business people do create value too by connecting people, making things happen, etc., but often their value output is overrated. Many actors and musici…

You are conflating fairness vs. justice. The world is far from fair -- genetics, place of birth, medical conditions, accidents, etc will always exist like you mention.

The moral/civil question is what is the role of government in an unfair world?

Most governments opt to head down the justice route predominately (e.g. the US's Justice System holding 1/3 of our government powers) while creating a myriad of "fairness" regulations (e.g. welfare programs). The ultimate problem with this approach is people will rarely agree on what is fair. There is no set definition and wants/desires change over time -- even needs do to (like needing a cell phone now vs 20 years ago). This ever evolving definition of fairness is what ensures this debate will rage on indefinitely.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#137

Post by nostrademons »

vectorpush wrote: post #108

Almost everyone here seems to be discussing the economic challenges of UBI, but so far I haven't seen much mention of the political challenges. UBI is a completely unworkable concept in the U.S.A and likely many European countries as well. American citizens will be literally shooting eachother in the streets before they accept such a massive wealth redistribution mechanism, and that resistance will be mostly made up…

It's useful to think of what sort of institutions are required for social stability before you need them. It's semi-likely that Americans will be shooting each other in the streets anyway, and so when they get tired of it and are ready to say "Never again...let's fix the root problem so we never get to this point again", there are options whose consequences have been explored.

Recall the history of labor unions in the U.S. The AFL-CIO was formed in 1886. The 1890s and early 1900s featured strikes where there actually was shooting in the streets, widespread rioting, bomb-throwing anarchists, and general pubic and social unrest. It took 2 world wars and a great depression before the U.S. got to the "golden age" of labor union capitalism that certain people want to recreate today.

If you don't test out possible solutions on a small scale before the old social order disintegrates, you get things like the Communist Bloc, where revolutionaries overthrow the old system, but then install a new system that sounds good in theory but really doesn't work in practice.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#138

Post by politician »

dang wrote: post #84

We changed the URL from https://medium.com/world-economic-forum/why-we-should-all-ha... , which points to this. Although basic income is obviously a well-worn topic, this article seems a bit more substantive than average. So we'll try downweighting this thread less than we usually do for well-worn topics.

It's good to hear confirmation that you're doing this sort of thing. May I suggest surfacing this drag coefficient to the UI, so that people know what you've done?

It looks pretty sleazy when a young thread with high engagement (comments and upvotes) nonetheless slides to the second page.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#139

Post by thephyber »

vectorpush wrote: post #108

Almost everyone here seems to be discussing the economic challenges of UBI, but so far I haven't seen much mention of the political challenges. UBI is a completely unworkable concept in the U.S.A and likely many European countries as well. American citizens will be literally shooting eachother in the streets before they accept such a massive wealth redistribution mechanism, and that resistance will be mostly made up…

I've heard convincing arguments[1] from economists that we should convert our existing "safety net" and "welfare" programs to simple UBI (aka BIG).

The argument tends to circle around the fact that the existing programs dis-incentivize getting off disability or Section 8 because the recipient is penalized in a step-function way (as soon as they get a job, they may become ineligible or could be charged with a crime). A well crafted UBI such that it's an income tax rebate (not to be confused with tax credits or tax deductions) to replace the many smaller safety-net / welfare programs eliminates the disincentive for people to get off these specialized programs that already exists.

While I don't think Americans are well informed enough to make a rational decision (and will likely be swayed by emotion), I think there are reasonable arguments for UBI / BIG.

[1] http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2017/01/munger_on_the_b....

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#140

Post by X86BSD »

omilu wrote: post #30

Here is the same author in 2014 attempting to explain how basic income won't lead to massive inflation: https://medium.com/basic-income/wouldnt-unconditional-basic-... >>> It would not be new money, just money shifted from one location to another. This means that the value of each dollar has not changed. The dollar itself has only changed hands.* There is no sure fire way to reduce the value of a dollar then to redis…

Im confused by your claim "There is no sure fire way to reduce the value of a dollar..."

The dollar has lost 97% of its value since the federal reserve was created. To me, having a federal reserve is a sure fire way to reduce the value of a dollar.

I would rather work today for pre-1965 quarters made of silver than a dollar today. The pre-1965 quarter will buy a gallon of gas. The dollar today will require three to buy that same gallon. Proof is in the pudding as they say. The currency is the problem.

Post reply on HN