Finland’s Basic Income Experiment Shows Recipients Are Happier and More Secure • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by perfunctory » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 12:58 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #125

perfunctory wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am employed and making more than 100K and still I am not doing anything productive for society. So even if I quit given UBI and become "unproductive" it will have no meaningful impact on anything.

You're presumably doing something productive for somebody who's willing to pay you $100K for it. Or do you work for the government?

It's complicated but in general if somebody is willing (or has to) to pay you it's not per se productive. In a society where everyone's basic needs are guaranteed to be covered we both would have made different choices.

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

#162

Post by fxj » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:00 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #158

fxj wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The security that you have medical care, food and housing tomorrow takes away a lot of psychological pressure and your mind can think about other things. But nevertheless I also think about the ethical implications of letting people die because they cannot afford the medical care they need. A society that just thinks only about profitability of a person is in itself unjust and inhumane.

If you look at communities where large portions of the population have their basic medical care, food, and housing all provided or paid for by the government, you don't see hotbeds of creative and entrepreneurial activity. You see cesspools of drugs and crime.

Like Switzerland and Sweden? What are you talking about?

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

#163

Post by dalbasal » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:01 PM UTC

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?”

The ubi debate is surprisingly diverse.

You could line up knowledgeable opponents and proponents, and you would probably find their reasons vary wildly. They also come from all over the political map.

But I agree with you. It seems odd to me that people are worried about an income harming people on average, or even affecting employment. We already have plenty of people with passive incomes, and they don't generally become depressed bums. They're called rich people.

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

#164

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:01 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #85

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?”

> But the real question imo is “does this scale without destroying the country’s finances?” It depends on how it is implemented and the numbers involved. 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. This allows one to get get enough for the bare necessities (shelter, food) "for free", but if you want to have a…

Giving everyone $10K/year would just inflate prices until $10K was the zero baseline for income.

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

#165

Post by jchrisa » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:06 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #164

throw0101a wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the real question imo is “does this scale without destroying the country’s finances?” It depends on how it is implemented and the numbers involved. 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. This allows one to get get enough for the bare necessities (shelter, food) "for free", but if you want to have a…

Giving everyone $10K/year would just inflate prices until $10K was the zero baseline for income.

I'd expect the opposite. Giving a UBI would suddenly give the poorest people a voice in the market, and industries that are currently bottom-feeder would become inclusive and thriving. Eg payday loans becomes small business loans. Dollar stores get better fresh produce, etc.

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

#166

Post by SolaceQuantum » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:13 PM UTC

mises wrote: post #116

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A sizeable portion, maybe, but certainly not all (and probably not even most). Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do? Let alone pay them for?

"Do you think crocheting, knitting, bingo, and dancing are honestly good things to put people to do?"

You also ignored my first and more explained upon example, volunteering. Is there a reason for that?

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

#167

Post by SiempreViernes » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:15 PM UTC

b_tterc_p wrote: post #133

fxj wrote: post #65

A big problem about the basic income is that it is perceived as money that you get for nothing and so people don't have to work and therefore they are lazy. Let me give you an analogy: Imagine that breathing air would cost money and you would have to work in order to breathe. Unless you don't work you would die. Would then a basic income be something that makes you lazy or would it be something that gives you confide…

You’re basically saying that because it has ethical value it can’t make people lazy. That’s irrelevant. UBI might make people lazy. In fact, it would be pretty shocking if it didn’t make some % of the population choose to do nothing for their entire lives but stay at home and play video games. People like to point out that techies would feel more comfortable building start ups, and that’s probably true. But for peopl…

While it is certainly possible to give people enough money to become uninterested of working, one of the conclusions of the experiment is that the UBI version tested did not make people less efficient at seeking employment. UBI just made them happier.

In other words, not implementing their UBI version is simply a way to punish unemployed people for not having a job. You can still argue that unemployed people should be unhappy, but you no longer have any basis for saying that unhappines will make them more likely to get a job.

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

#168

Post by SiempreViernes » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:16 PM UTC

fxj wrote: post #162

ams6110 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at communities where large portions of the population have their basic medical care, food, and housing all provided or paid for by the government, you don't see hotbeds of creative and entrepreneurial activity. You see cesspools of drugs and crime.

Like Switzerland and Sweden? What are you talking about?

Putting them both in the same sentence so nobody will spot you keep getting them mixed up? Smart move ;)

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

#169

Post by SiempreViernes » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

swebs wrote: post #155

SiempreViernes wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true. But on the other hand it seems that for the same cost people got happier, while not affecting employment levels. So it also shows that placing conditions on unemployment support creates wasted effort and extra suffering.

>for the same cost It's a higher cost since you're now also paying the employed.

Not in this experiment, which is what I was talking about.

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

#170

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 1:23 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #164

throw0101a wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the real question imo is “does this scale without destroying the country’s finances?” It depends on how it is implemented and the numbers involved. 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. This allows one to get get enough for the bare necessities (shelter, food) "for free", but if you want to have a…

Giving everyone $10K/year would just inflate prices until $10K was the zero baseline for income.

> Giving everyone $10K/year would just inflate prices until $10K was the zero baseline for income.

That doesn't make sense. A downward redistribution (which UBI is) is going to inflate prices of goods with disproportionate low-end demand and deflate those with disproportionate high-end demand somewhat, but in any plausible scenario it will still (before considering any effects of reactive production shifts) increase the buying power on the low end and decrease it on the high end, even after the effects of price level changes.