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

91–100 of 205 posts

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

#91

Post by tzs »

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…

> It's like retirement: some may learn a skill, volunteer, etc., but most just watch TV and wait to die

How much of that is due to retirement coming for most people when they are old? I'm pretty sure that if I retire at, say, 67, I'll spend a lot more time watching TV than I would if I had retired at 27.

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

#92

Post by Spooky23 »

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?”

Actually, it is. When you don’t approach social welfare as a corrective action of a defective person, this is evidence of a positive effect similar to social security. It’s very different than the norm.

When you think about the money spent on nursing homes, daycare, juvenile justice or even kids who extend college due to the need to work, society pays a big bill directly or indirectly.

My family does well, but we realized that expenses like daycare, summer camps, etc made it such that having one of us take a sabbatical would only cost a few hundred bucks a month, and be a better outcome for our family. Not many folks have that luxury, and imo we are all worse off for it.

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

#94

Post by r3bl »

Talyen42 wrote: post #35
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.

Usually the goal of UBI is to lift everyone above the poverty line, not to make everyone's lives comfortable.

If you're happy living as a lazy fuck just shy of poverty, you're welcome to do so. If you want some comfort, security, and the ability to not anticipate each 1st of the month, you'd probably still want to work.

I personally think that UBI is a requirement for us to be able to say that we each have a fair shot at success. Nobody should worry about having a roof over their head or providing food on the table. We have plenty of both for each human in the world already.

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

#95

Post by NedIsakoff »

I have some concerns about this experiment, but I may be wrong.

The whole idea of basic income is that the basic income would be enough for a person to live. Having never been to Finland (but other northern European countries), I can't see how you can live on 560€ a month without some other source of income or social assistance.

The people in the study are told that the basic income will end in two years, wouldn't that change their behavior? I mean if they know the money is temporary they're not to change their behavior too much.

I know for myself if they gave me 700CAD an month for an basic income experiment for two years, I would be "cool extra cash". However I won't change my behavior job/career wise as 1) its not enough to live on; and 2) its going to end.

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

#96

Post by hak8or »

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.

States don't have anywhere near as high of a margin in terms of essential expenses (infrastructure, etc) vs entitlements (social security, health insurance, etc) as the federal government does in the USA. The fed has more money to spend than states.

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

#97

Post by llcoolv »

llcoolv wrote: post #45
criley2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

alright, then why it is not voluntary? the people who would want to share with others are free to do so. why use violence? why put in jail people who refuse to be robbed?

wasn't expecting that a comment questioning the use of violence would get so many downvotes... apparently we have really regressed as human beings.

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

#98

Post by SolaceQuantum »

mises wrote: post #80
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd suggest looking at retirement- one of the important facets of retirement is the encouragement to continue contributing to society once retired because it is always necessary to be productive in some way or form for the human condition as we understand it. It is psychologically damaging to not be constantly doing stuff that is at least mildly fulfilling in some way. If a sizeable portion or even a majority of peop…

How do you propose to do this? We have a lot of trouble doing it with old people already.

Do we? I'm unaware of that, actually. I was under the impression it was widely known that retired people are the sizeable portion of those who volunteer for anything in particular, and there's the existing tropes of retired people getting into art and fitness, and community activities. Book clubs. Crochet/knitting clubs. Bingo. Dancing.

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

#99

Post by mises »

sewercake wrote: post #33
kvczor wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think you may be picking up on a but of a cultural difference here. In America, people are identified, both by themselves and by others, in a large part by there job. It's a huge part of personal and cultural/societal identity.

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

#100

Post by throw0101a »

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…

> If you give people everything, they just won't work as hard.

But are we talking about giving people "everything" though? The word "Basic" is in the thing's name, so it may be just enough to not die (or turn to crime).

One proposal [1] would be to give everyone $US 10K per year starting at age 21, and not having income taxes start until you have an income over US$ 40K.

$10K is enough, in many places, to pay rent and food, but not much else. So you won't have the worry / stress of being homeless, but if you want more than subsistence living, you will probably have to work.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-are...

Post reply on HN