11–20 of 205 posts
As a former fine arts student that became a UI developer mostly for the monetary stability, I do feel like if I had the ability to fully invest myself creating art without constantly struggling with relevancy and rent, I would have been far more qualitatively useful to society at large.
Basic income means that people who are willing to work will pay probably higher taxes. I believe that will be easier for some people who do not earn much to just stay home with basic income. Then less people will be economically active (who will do low wage jobs ?) and taxes will need to go higher etc... It's economical spiral of death for whole nation.
The goal is to provide a sustainable and desirable quality of life for all, and economic activity is one or part of a way to achieve it. I don’t think people will just stop wanting to go out to restaurants, or skiing, or whatever other activities they want to do. And if they want to do them, they will have to work. And especially to attract a quality mate.
Then what is there left to work for? Also, I thought the job of a society was to protect it's citizens' negative rights (various freedoms from, freedom from want not being one).
I think this might turn out something like retirement, as people will have to work less: some people make very good use of their extra resources, but many will just sit and watch TV. This is a bit in an inherent bias in the HN crowd, because most of us tend to be more intellectually curious and would likely spend the time learning a new language, etc.
Basic income means that people who are willing to work will pay probably higher taxes. I believe that will be easier for some people who do not earn much to just stay home with basic income. Then less people will be economically active (who will do low wage jobs ?) and taxes will need to go higher etc... It's economical spiral of death for whole nation.
Basic income means that people who are willing to work will pay probably higher taxes. I believe that will be easier for some people who do not earn much to just stay home with basic income. Then less people will be economically active (who will do low wage jobs ?) and taxes will need to go higher etc... It's economical spiral of death for whole nation.
Creating a death spiral because consumers buying things is the fuel which makes the entire economy run and grow, so when you fire them all and replace them with robots, your individual profit might temporarily rise but as we all do it, more and more fall out of the workplace and can no longer consume, hurting the economy based on consuming.
Basic income may come across as a luxury today, in a world where there can still be enough jobs for the number of people in the economy, but it very well may become a requirement to ensure that consumers exist to buy automatically produced and automatically served goods.
P.S. the taxes don't necessarily rise on the workers, but rather on the automators and producers. The amount of income and wealth in this country is not decreasing, rather, the amount of it going to workers and consumers is. Is it ideal to have the government redistribute it such that the engine stops running poorly and works well again? No, but the alternative is worse.
Is it a legitimate argument that smart hardworking people who are considered economically valuable will be swayed to non-economically valuable interests within this system? As a former fine arts student that became a UI developer mostly for the monetary stability, I do feel like if I had the ability to fully invest myself creating art without constantly struggling with relevancy and rent, I would have been far more q…
- How much does this actually happen? - Is the job market over or under satisfied? - Does what people end up doing somehow turn out valuable to society, even if not in a way we know how to assign monetary value?
There are so many unknowns. Great that somebody are actually trying it out and getting us some data.
Is it a legitimate argument that smart hardworking people who are considered economically valuable will be swayed to non-economically valuable interests within this system? As a former fine arts student that became a UI developer mostly for the monetary stability, I do feel like if I had the ability to fully invest myself creating art without constantly struggling with relevancy and rent, I would have been far more q…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The goal is to provide a sustainable and desirable quality of life for all, and economic activity is one or part of a way to achieve it. I don’t think people will just stop wanting to go out to restaurants, or skiing, or whatever other activities they want to do. And if they want to do them, they will have to work. And especially to attract a quality mate.
> desirable quality of life for all Then what is there left to work for? Also, I thought the job of a society was to protect it's citizens' negative rights (various freedoms from, freedom from want not being one). I think this might turn out something like retirement, as people will have to work less: some people make very good use of their extra resources, but many will just sit and watch TV. This is a bit in an inh…
Perhaps to pass the time? You can’t just sit around and do nothing.
Basic income means that people who are willing to work will pay probably higher taxes. I believe that will be easier for some people who do not earn much to just stay home with basic income. Then less people will be economically active (who will do low wage jobs ?) and taxes will need to go higher etc... It's economical spiral of death for whole nation.
Why can't UBI be attempted on a local scale first? We have state and local governments for a reason. Something as risky and expensive as UBI, if it is going to be implemented, should be implemented gradually with proper testing, feedback, and adaptation.