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

Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 205 posts

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#31

Post by mises »

If you give people everything, they just won't work as hard. At least, I don't think they will over the long term. It's like retirement: some may learn a skill, volunteer, etc., but most just watch TV and wait to die. This is hard for many of us to realize, because we spend much of our free time tinkering with and leaning technologies.

I hear a lot of people saying that society is bound to provide all the needs of a person. I can definitively say for America, that was not the social contract on which she was founded.

Lastly, this is sort of conspiratorial, but isn't this commonly the way we see dystopias arise in stories? I think democracies function differently when the average person is a net contributor that expects a return in the form if infrastructure and services, rather than a check.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#32

Post by nickez »

mises wrote: post #31

If you give people everything, they just won't work as hard. At least, I don't think they will over the long term. It's like retirement: some may learn a skill, volunteer, etc., but most just watch TV and wait to die. This is hard for many of us to realize, because we spend much of our free time tinkering with and leaning technologies. I hear a lot of people saying that society is bound to provide all the needs of a…

Having enough money for housing and food is not "everything". People will always want more and this will drive them to work. They will just be a little bit more secure and happy.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#33

Post by sewercake »

kvczor wrote: post #25
spaceribs wrote: post #11

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…

Doesn't the fact that you earn more by doing UI work prove that you are far more useful to society than by making art?

I think you're equating 'society' with 'the market' here.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#34

Post by fsloth »

michelledepeil wrote: post #22
klaudius wrote: post #3

Why not just look at people who don't work but receive income - young people, retirees, wealthy people etc. to see what behavior under UBI looks like?

except they are not representative of an entire society - specifically they are only representative (usually) of a subgroup of society that _cannot_ work.

This. If you take existing pensioners then you are preselecting a population that is wildly different than the population that the UBI scheme would target.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#35

Post by Talyen42 »

spaceribs wrote: post #11

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…

As an employed person making 100k, if given UBI I would quit and not do anything productive-to-society for most of the rest of my life. So yes, that is a legitimate argument. The counter-argument is that the benefit coming from more people pursuing entrepreneurial/risk-taking/passion-driven endeavors will OUTWEIGH the lazy fucks like me.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#36

Post by jchrisa »

spaceribs wrote: post #11

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…

Some of my most productive moments have been when I'm following my own whimsy, instead of responding to economic pressure. I can only imagine this effect, scaled up, would be a net benefit for society.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#37

Post by zip1234 »

criley2 wrote: post #14
raaaaraaaa122 wrote: post #2

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.

When you realize that automation is eating the jobs that these people used to do, and realize that the service economy can't fit even a fraction of these displaced workers, you have a scenario where we can produce goods for sale in mass with minimal labor but now less people have money to buy things. Creating a death spiral because consumers buying things is the fuel which makes the entire economy run and grow, so wh…

Everyone has thought that automation would eliminate the jobs for a hundred years. In a way it has come true as some jobs that existed before no longer exist, but so far other jobs have been created to take their place. Nobody really knows when or if that will stop.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#38

Post by mdp553 »

m52go wrote: post #7

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.

This is seemingly exactly what Finland is doing according to the article. Finland is trialling this approach with on a small subset of eligible people (n = ~ 2000) to assess the effects and allow feedback, etc.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#39

Post by mises »

shireboy wrote: post #19

I’m sorry, but “getting free money makes people happy” isn’t exactly a shocking result is it? The result that the employment level was consistent is mildly interesting, though I’d expect the numbers could be different with a longer or larger test. But the real question imo is “does this scale without destroying the country’s finances?”

This. From what I understand, raising taxes goes over better most places than in America. It's also worth pointing out that Norway, a country with an incredibly generous entitlement program, funds a huge amount of it via oil production.

Re: Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure

#40

Post by return0 »

The fact that the proponents of UBI pretend to be content with "free money made people happier" is probably a sign that the experiment did not go as expected. Regardless, i think the bigger question here is how would UBI prevented the negative effects of the allegedly impeding large-scale unemployment. How did recipients use their time apart from seeking work. How were their relationships to the rest of society and vice versa? Does UBI result in 2 classes of people instead of a spectrum? What were their spending habits and are they conductive to a functioning economy?
Post reply on HN