Basic Income Research Proposal • Hacker News Board

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#41

Post by chimeracoder » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:54 PM UTC

SimbaOnSteroids wrote: post #24

influx wrote: post #8

At what point does the government controlling your income start to impede personal freedom? Wouldn't any politician campaigning to increase the basic income be almost automatically elected?

You're still free to seek out other sources of income under these models and the amount recieved from the government effectively decreases as income is raised due to taxes you pay into the system. >Wouldn't any politician campaigning on this automatically get elected? No, lay people would be quick to confuse this with communism. The irony of it is that this sort of a system was one of the few things Keynes and Friedm…

> The irony of it is that this sort of a system was one of the few things Keynes and Friedman agreed should be part of public policy.

Milton Friedman did not say that this should be part of public policy, though his words are commonly interpreted very generously to imply that he did, by people who wish to demonstrate that this is a policy with "conservative support".

What Friedman actually said is that the cash value of all welfare and other support systems is greater than the in-kind value. That's a pretty narrow statement. In theory, that sounds like it's a statement of support, but it's really not. In practice, basically nobody is actually proposing doing away with all welfare, social security, government subsidies, etc., because it would be a political non-starter. Even if we scope this discussion to the context of the YC research experiment, that's plainly evident, because there's no stipulation that the participants abstain from all other forms of public assistance, as well as deduct the cash value of every other stipend and subsidy that they receive from the $1000 payment.

Comparing what Freidman wrote about to this proposal is like trying to discuss Adam Smith in the context of the political left, on the basis of the common term "liberal". Yes, there technically exists a frame of reference in which that's a meaningful comparison, but it's not a particularly useful or relevant frame of reference, and it does nothing but mislead and obfuscate the actual details of the underlying facts.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#42

Post by MarkPNeyer » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:54 PM UTC

JOnAgain wrote: post #32

adangert wrote: post #26

You know this might be speculative, but I feel like a basic income applied to a national allows that population to act more like an ant hive. In the sense that only 3% of the population is actually doing the real hard work, but this is a healthy paradigm, and is much better than forcing individuals who shouldn't be doing the work they currently are to pursue things they actually care about, such as taking care of lov…

A lot more video games will be played

Much better than, say, working the TSA, a jobs program based on invading privacy under the ridiculous exaggerated thread of terrorism. I WISH those people would just stay home and play video games.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#43

Post by FreakyT » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:55 PM UTC

vasco wrote: post #28

I would speculate that any end date on this scenario will invalidate results. What a person does if it is guaranteed a job for life vs 5 years is wildly different, as you'll need to make sure when those 5 years are up, you'll be ready to enter the job market again, etc. I believe the same will happen with basic income. If we want to study where people gravitate to more fulfilling jobs, feel happier and so on, you nee…

Absolutely, and this is also the problem with every* other basic income study that's been conducted over the past few decades.

If you promise basic income for only 5 years, then I'm probably not going to quit my job and become an artist because I can't be unemployed for 5 years and expect to waltz back into a job. If you promise basic income "forever", then I'm far more likely to retire at 30 and plan to never work again.

* I believe this is the case, correct me if there are any I missed

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#44

Post by wavefunction » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:55 PM UTC

superlopuh wrote: post #17

How will the 1000 a month be treated in a fiscal sense? I have close to no knowledge about the US tax system, but I would guess it has some impact. Also, will be interesting to see the difference in results from this study to ones done in countries where healthcare is free or subsidised.

The effective tax rate an individual would face depends on how much income an individual derives from other sources during this time in addition to the basic income, along with their household demographics (number of children, marriage situation).

By itself with no other income sources the individual would fall below the US federal poverty level[0] by $60 and would likely qualify for some Earned Income Credits[1] as well as subsidized health care.

Adding children or a spouse (especially a working one) will crank the tax rate up or down.

Then there is an entire universe of tax complexity having to do with credits and penalties an individual or family might face.

[0]https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#45

Post by roymurdock » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:55 PM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #23

Really awesome to see this coming together. 2 q's - how was the $1,000 per month figure calculated, and will you be deploying in a small, low-income, isolated community where local inflation might occur, a large metropolitan community, distributed randomly across the 2 states? Interesting problems to consider in this study design!

Found the answer to my sampling question: "As described above, we will select areas for the study by taking a stratified random sample of Census tracts in large regions within the two states where median household income does not exceed the area median income. After sampling tracts, we will randomly select addresses within tracts from USPS DSF (a sampling frame of all addresses). We will screen selected addresses for eligibility, ultimately enrolling no more than one percent of individuals within a Census tract. We may use available administrative data eliminate as many ineligible households from the sampling frame as possible to cut down on recruitment and enrollment costs, but we are examining the reliability of this data during the pilot. We are contracting with a survey research firm with extensive experience fielding national studies to assist with sampling, manage recruitment, and conduct in- person enrollment and baseline surveys."

To my thinking it would have been interesting to study the possible inflation effects (treat the isolated community as representative for the whole country) but I'm sure there is a good reason/past research for structuring the sample this way.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#46

Post by LoSboccacc » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:55 PM UTC

vasco wrote: post #28

I would speculate that any end date on this scenario will invalidate results. What a person does if it is guaranteed a job for life vs 5 years is wildly different, as you'll need to make sure when those 5 years are up, you'll be ready to enter the job market again, etc. I believe the same will happen with basic income. If we want to study where people gravitate to more fulfilling jobs, feel happier and so on, you nee…

being time limited it gives you an actual hard value, so it becomes negotiable. I wonder if anyone will instead just use that to negotiate some credit at a favorable rate (say, 50k for those 60k) and actually start something greater than the expected subsistence.

Generally speaking, this would probably be the most efficient use of UBI: you trade it all away as soon as you exit college and invest it in something. I can see whole branches of financial and life insurance services growing out of this market.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#47

Post by kolbe » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:56 PM UTC

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't UBI operate on the premise that it's replacing many of the existing social programs? For example, unconditional money rather than food/housing assistance. If the participants of the study also get access to these things, doesn't that severely limit the usefulness of this study?

Also, $1k/mo is pretty small. Are you just hoping to observe some behavioral changes at the margin with which to extrapolate?

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#48

Post by Hydraulix989 » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:56 PM UTC

FreakyT wrote: post #43

vasco wrote: post #28

I would speculate that any end date on this scenario will invalidate results. What a person does if it is guaranteed a job for life vs 5 years is wildly different, as you'll need to make sure when those 5 years are up, you'll be ready to enter the job market again, etc. I believe the same will happen with basic income. If we want to study where people gravitate to more fulfilling jobs, feel happier and so on, you nee…

Absolutely, and this is also the problem with every* other basic income study that's been conducted over the past few decades. If you promise basic income for only 5 years, then I'm probably not going to quit my job and become an artist because I can't be unemployed for 5 years and expect to waltz back into a job. If you promise basic income "forever", then I'm far more likely to retire at 30 and plan to never work a…

This is why Patreon still makes a lot more sense for artists.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#49

Post by anovikov » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:57 PM UTC

roceasta wrote: post #35

I like the idea of basic income but I confess that my ideal of a basic income recipient is someone akin to the 19th-century amateur scientist subsisting on a private income whilst making original contributions to human knowledge, and, as a side effect, to society. Whereas the reality of people receiving free money might be somewhat different. There's the drip, drip welfare payments of just enough money to survive wit…

It means putting 99% of recipients, or more, into illustion which will result in nothing but a severe depression in a few years. Suddenly being able to contribute to the world in a 'larger' way, they will quickly realize that they can't - just as many startup founders. Maybe, need to meet the bills by mind-numbing work is really a blessing for most people - i had stable income almost without work for years and i got very, very depressed.

Re: Basic Income Research Proposal

#50

Post by wavefunction » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:57 PM UTC

FreakyT wrote: post #43

vasco wrote: post #28

I would speculate that any end date on this scenario will invalidate results. What a person does if it is guaranteed a job for life vs 5 years is wildly different, as you'll need to make sure when those 5 years are up, you'll be ready to enter the job market again, etc. I believe the same will happen with basic income. If we want to study where people gravitate to more fulfilling jobs, feel happier and so on, you nee…

Absolutely, and this is also the problem with every* other basic income study that's been conducted over the past few decades. If you promise basic income for only 5 years, then I'm probably not going to quit my job and become an artist because I can't be unemployed for 5 years and expect to waltz back into a job. If you promise basic income "forever", then I'm far more likely to retire at 30 and plan to never work a…

Or you've got five years to work a reduced schedule and see if you can "make it" as an artist.

Seems great, as opposed to just trying to make it while working full time.