Live data from Hacker News

Why we should all have a basic income

weforum.org

441–450 of 492 posts

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#441
post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would you rather pay somebody to build the next Lincoln Tunnel or pay for them to write some poetry and start an emo band? Would you rather pay somebody to build the next Bridge to Nowhere or pay them to start the next Apple?

That's not really a fair response to the parent's comment, but I suppose the parent's comment was entirely charitable to the proposed hypothetical either. A more rigorous question with which to start (though maybe a bit leading...) would be: Would you rather pay qualified labor force participants to do labor/construction/civil engineering, or would you rather pay the same number of qualified participants to start hig…

> That's not really a fair response to the parent's comment, but I suppose the parent's comment was entirely charitable to the proposed hypothetical either.

That was the point.

> Would you rather pay qualified labor force participants to do labor/construction/civil engineering, or would you rather pay the same number of qualified participants to start high growth technology companies?

To which the answer is almost certainly, both. Because we need roads and infrastructure, but we also need a safety net, and they are not the same thing.

> I haven't actually done the math, but my intuition (which could be wrong!) is that it makes more sense to pay for people to e.g. fix America's insanely expensive and inefficient transportation system than to pay for them to sit in a garage and try to "innovate."

Literally starting a multibillion dollar company is obviously not the one most people are going to do. But a UBI also lets you quit your terrible job and still pay rent while attending community college, so you can get a better job tomorrow. Or use the safety net go to a new place where you're more likely to find better employment opportunities. Or start a normal small business that nobody ever expects to be Apple or Walmart but after a couple years will be able to pay you a middle class wage.

And the best part is that you have self-interested people figuring it out for themselves.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#443
post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uruguay.

Interesting. As someone who has never been there, I always had a positive impression of Uruguay, and have even remarked on HN that I'd like to live there for a while. What I've read about Uruguay has all been very positive and by many indicators it seems prosperous in comparison to other countries in the region. What's your impression of the country as a whole?

We've enjoyed great global PR, that's for sure. A good bunch of it undeserved.

There was a huge uproar about us legalizing pot. While you can now grow your own cannabis, the most important part: legal sale, is yet to be finalized despite plans starting 5 years ago without power changing hands.

There was another huge PR boost with the story about "Uruguay's poor president José Mujica". His administration ended as one of the worst ever experienced in the country's republican (as in Republic, not the US party) history. Corruption hit new peaks with public enterprise bleeding money into party officials' pockets left and right, something we're still paying via "tarifazos" (annual increases in costs of public infrastructure such as electricity, fuel and telecommunications despite their production costs going down).

Reality is that moving here can be suicide for many, as we're one of the most expensive countries to live in of Latin America (and the world) when you account for salaries. We have a growing culture of crime with a government that's disinterested in fixing it, and often tries to downplay it. Import tariffs are insane (usually 150%+ over retail price), and while citizens can make a few international orders under 200 USD without being taxed (used to be 5, then 4, now they just changed it to 3), it helps little and I expect they will scrap them altogether next year.

And oh my god the bureaucracy. It's the only thing more central to the Uruguayan identity than mate and football. The past couple of leftist administrations and this current one has been all about e-government, yet most interactions with the government will be in a crowded office after waiting an hour waiting for your number to come up on the screen. The little web infrastructure we have is inconsistent across public enterprises, is ridiculously insecure (national ISP, Antel, has a max password length of 8 alphanumeric characters; all sites are made in hacked together PHP and/or ASP.NET by FullStackOverflow programmers and one determined black hat could probably stop the country for a while in a boring weekend) and despite the government's interest in tracking all financial transactions, they're in no rush to implement online payment.

My SO starts studying engineering this year, and with me being a software developer (meaning remote is an option and there's offerings everywhere), our hope is that either a miracle happens or we fuck right off after she gets her diploma. We have a deeply ingrained cultural and political problem that will not allow the country to get out of this hole. But then again, Donald Trump is the leader of the free world; it's fair to expect the unexpectable when it comes to political change.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#444
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.

Dang! That's great!

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Street promoters make me sad. If they can find no job they better stay at home and learn something new, but they have no time for it, so they are stuck doing useless, maybe even harmful, work.

I've met someone who spun a sign for a living... he was a huge stoner... I love weed, but he clearly smoked too much of it while his brain was still developing and he could barely hold a conversation... Now... maybe he was self-medicating or whatever... but the point was he failed out of high school, failed out of a few jobs... and then ended up spinning a sign because he really had no meaningful skill to contribute…

At any given time, some fraction of people are going to be burnouts. That's just a fact. I think they still deserve a baseline of wellbeing, without judgment. If they use it to better themselves, great. If not, oh well. But we spend so much time and effort trying to pick the winners rather than simply giving people a minimal foundation.

For those of us with work ethic (the vast majority of everyone, to varying extents), our extra effort will be rewarded by the market, if we do something that other people find valuable, or intrinsically, if we're just doing what we love.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can take turns naming even more expensive high rises, but the goal is to show that increase in high rises leads to drastic overall decrease in cost of living. Manhattan, in theory, should be dirt cheap as far as $/sq.ft. due to massive supply, and it's not. Neither is Singapore or Shanghai. There's a natural price floor for such buildings, and it's not yet competitive with pricing on cheaper options, such as subur…

> Manhattan, in theory, should be dirt cheap as far as $/sq.ft. due to massive supply, and it's not. Because it's supply and demand . The demand is very high in Manhattan. What we would expect is that anywhere there is such high demand that the price is higher than the construction cost, there would be new construction (increase in supply) until prices fall to meet the construction cost. In other words the cost of an…

> But we don't see that because of zoning regulations that prohibit it.

Are you sure that's the one and only answer? There are some cities with very lax zoning regulations, Dallas or Houston come to mind. And yet we don't see a massive migration from suburbs to the high rises. Are there any cities that could serve as examples to support your theory? It's not like residential high-rises are a recent phenomenon.

You'd have to do a bit more explanation on property taxes - governments stand to collect more property taxes per sq.ft. of land used from high rises than from detached single-family, so a municipality is generally interested in cramming more units into a land lot, not less. How do property taxes discourage construction?

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right about the wealth producers! We need a 100% inheritance tax! That way the wealth isn't going to people who didn't produce it! Then you redistribute that money to schools and training programs and small businesses to give opportunities to anyone to become a wealth producer! This improves the entire human race and not just the rich trust fund babies who haven't produced anything in their lives. I'm totally…

Your comment makes an excellent point. If our economy really was organized around incentivizing production, there are many things we could do to that end. In addition to a 100% inheritance tax, we could also surely implement policies that discouraged most types of rent-seeking and the passive growth of wealth that has allowed the richest in our country to become even richer without having to produce anything.

Like being an absentee landlord. If owning and renting out property you do not live at and are only collecting passive income from was made illegal, way more people would be able to afford housing and it would solve a lot of equality issues. The whole practice is literal rent-seeking and only concentrates capital in the hands of a small minority.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it presupposes highly monopolistic behavior that doesn't seem very likely to work for most markets. Higher education costs expanded to absorb the extra money from the student loans thrown at them, healthcare costs increased as more consumers started competing for a fixed supply of appointment slots, hospital beds and medical services.

> Higher education costs expanded to absorb the extra money from the student loans thrown at them That's because they're catastrophically stupid industry-specific interest rate subsidies. A dollar for tuition is then less expensive than a dollar for anything else, so everyone conspires to buy things with the cheap government money that isn't available when used for anything else. And that process is highly inefficien…

> because it's basically a huge implicit fraud scheme to redirect subsidized student loan money to things that aren't strictly education, which no one can admit to out loud or explicitly negotiate for

I agree, but how does showing up with a wad of cash instead of a check from a student loan agency increase your negotiating power? Large number of international students today (Chinese and Saudi until recently) paid cash and yet had little say on football teams, new administrative buildings or spending in general. The university system just goes out and borrows whatever it feels like, the debt service is added to expenses.

UBI also removes the advantage of centralized negotiating power that's beneficial in industries like healthcare. With Medicare or a private insurance company the $500 list price for doctor's exam can be negotiated down to $99. With UBI it's the consumer against doctor's office, whch historically did not play out well due to massive information disadvantage.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've met someone who spun a sign for a living... he was a huge stoner... I love weed, but he clearly smoked too much of it while his brain was still developing and he could barely hold a conversation... Now... maybe he was self-medicating or whatever... but the point was he failed out of high school, failed out of a few jobs... and then ended up spinning a sign because he really had no meaningful skill to contribute…

At any given time, some fraction of people are going to be burnouts. That's just a fact. I think they still deserve a baseline of wellbeing, without judgment. If they use it to better themselves, great. If not, oh well. But we spend so much time and effort trying to pick the winners rather than simply giving people a minimal foundation. For those of us with work ethic (the vast majority of everyone, to varying extent…

I think UBI have a hard time gaining traction in the US. You're asking me to pay higher taxes to have an outcome where someone can actually do less than they currently do to contribute to society.

UBI is a very interesting concept, but in order to sell it you'd have to have a phased approach... one of the phases I think would have to include some sort of checks and balances.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because, if it turns out that most people are just fine with fucking off all day and living off their UBI check then UBI is unworkable (pardon the pun). The cycle would go something like this: * UBI checks start getting sent out * Large droves of people quit the shitty jobs * Due to reduced labor supply, cost of producing goods rises * The increased cost of living means that now we need to send out even bigger UBI ch…

Straw man. No data to support that; just a scare story. How about: cost of goods continues to drop as automation continues to expand explosively (as it has in the last 10 years). Standard of living rises steadily as the workforce decreases. What's the difference in the two scenarios? Data. Which we don't have. So certainly a UBI should be carefully introduced to keep the economy stable.

There's not any data to support it because there's no data around a nationwide, long-term UBI, period. All we have are little experiments where people know it could end at any time.
Post reply on HN