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

171–180 of 492 posts

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#171

Post by empthought »

cpursley wrote: post #131
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/

That's a research project, not a sustainable program. The putative benefits of UBI would only apply if it successfully takes the place of the "safety net" of programs already enacted.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#172

Post by edblarney »

programmarchy wrote: post #23

UBI is attempting to cloak itself in free market rhetoric, but it's bullshit. Yes it may "incentivize" some individuals to work, but only by disincentivizing others. It takes money from top wealth producers, discouraging their labor, and gives it to people who aren't producing as much wealth, effectively subsidizing unproductive work. This will make everyone poorer in the long run. The struggling artist meme is an ap…

"UBI is attempting to cloak itself in free market rhetoric, but it's bullshit."

I'm not a fan of UBI - but it's not 'bullshit' in the manner it's presented.

UBI is really a 'negative income tax' - and it was first proposed by 'Milton Freeman' - a super-duper free market capitalist.

If you take progressive taxation, then make the lower ends negative - you have UBI. The concept came from economists - not socialists.

But yes - it is being promoted as 'yet another form of redistribution' - but it is in many ways more economically sensible than some other ideas.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#173

Post by Mendenhall »

empthought wrote: post #158
Mendenhall wrote: post #153

Because what could possibly go wrong with making more people dependent on the government?

So how do you commute to work in the morning anyway? Stop using public infrastructure and suckling at the taxpayer's teat.

I dont commute to work in the morning, I work from home :). To address what I think is your point there is a difference between a road I pay taxes for and use/can as compared to giving money to an individual that you gain nothing from.

Also to me its not about taxes etc, its about the shift it would bring and the ramifications of having the government issue such a huge amount of money.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#174

Post by AnthonyMouse »

tomp wrote: post #56
bryanlarsen wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Americans currently consume (not necessarily eat) 3800 kcals/day of food without basic income. Are you saying that basic income will make that number go up? 2) The American housing market is very messed up and far from a free market, so any prediction up or down is very difficult. I predict that Basic Income will cause a bunch of people to move from high cost cities like NYC & SF into low cost areas so that they c…

> inflation is always a monetary phenomenon I don't understand this reasoning. Look, only one of the following can be true: (1) everyone can buy basic necessities of life, in which case nobody is poor and we don't need UBI, or (2) not everyone can buy the basic necessities of life. If (2) is true and we introduce UBI, then there will be more demand for the basic necessities of life (coming from all the people who wer…

> Look, only one of the following can be true: (1) everyone can buy basic necessities of life, in which case nobody is poor and we don't need UBI, or (2) not everyone can buy the basic necessities of life.

We have discovered the source of the misunderstanding.

(2) was true, which means we need a UBI or welfare and we already have welfare, so (1) is now also true.

What we are discussing is replacing welfare with a UBI, which increases the incentive to find work over welfare because unlike welfare you don't lose the UBI when you get a job.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#176

Post by vostok »

EliRivers wrote: post #164
jakeogh wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. Personal taxes (taking things via threat of force) are theft. It does not matter who is doing the taking.

You have redefined the English language for your own propaganda purposes. This significantly degrades any chance of you being taken seriously.

It's not necessarily for propaganda purposes, but I agree that this is a highly nonstandard terminology and it's not obvious to me that it improves anyone's ability to communicate.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#177

Post by AnthonyMouse »

akjainaj wrote: post #104
nickthemagicman wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the prices change? The demand hasn't changed? The supply hasn't changed? People are still buying the same basic things they did before. The money is simply shifted around from the rich to the poor?

I have the theory that if you give money to everybody, prices will go up because sellers will figure they can increase the price of everything without it negatively affecting sales, since every buyer simply has more money to spare, no excuses.

> I have the theory that if you give money to everybody, prices would go up because sellers will figure they can increase the price of everything without it negatively affecting sales, since every buyer simply has more money to spare, no excuses.

That's how monopoly markets work. But if you're a grocery store and you realize everybody now has $4 more in their pockets, you can't start charging $5 for an apple when the store across the street is still charging $1.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#178

Post by empthought »

Mendenhall wrote: post #173
empthought wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how do you commute to work in the morning anyway? Stop using public infrastructure and suckling at the taxpayer's teat.

I dont commute to work in the morning, I work from home :). To address what I think is your point there is a difference between a road I pay taxes for and use/can as compared to giving money to an individual that you gain nothing from. Also to me its not about taxes etc, its about the shift it would bring and the ramifications of having the government issue such a huge amount of money.

The government already issues this amount of money. It's just inefficiently distributed through individual and corporate welfare subsidies. A UBI would replace nearly all of that.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#179

Post by [deleted] »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #141
funkyy wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was same with industrialisation. All the crying that factories will destroy economies and cause massive unemployment which didn't do. It did a lot of good instead. Well, there was basic income in some communist countries and it failed on a social level.

Communism is not a basic income. Communism is the government telling you what your job is and giving you a minimal amount of resources and prohibiting you from earning a single extra dollar, and your choices are either take it or escape to West Germany. A basic income is the government unconditionally giving you enough money that you don't starve. Then if you want to e.g. own a car or send your kids to college or liv…

[deleted]

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#180

Post by kwhitefoot »

jjawssd wrote: post #115
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…

Americans do not trust that the government has their best interests in mind, ergo Americans do not want to have their money taken away from them to pay for government programs.

Like roads, air traffic control, sewers, clean water, etc., etc.?
Post reply on HN