People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report • Hacker News Board

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#471

Post by munk-a » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:45 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #438

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #170

From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Because in the current economy, a lot of people have to work unreasonable hours, multiple jobs, and have all people in a family work to make ends meet, at the cost of personal health and well-being, personal time, having children at all or having more children, getting married and buyi…

Ok, but work (productivity) is how you actually pay for UBI. So by giving UBI, you are decreasing the resources that pay for it.

We currently have intense income inequality in the world - pretty sure we can shave some off the top and the middle to help everyone live a healthier life.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#472

Post by jpttsn » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

multiplegeorges wrote: post #378

simonsarris wrote: post #88

This is very misleading reporting. First: All studies so far show a pretty consistent ~10% work disincentive. This is what all the detractors say when they say it disincentivizes work. So how about this one? From actually reading the study's conclusion: > Slightly less than one-fifth were employed before but unemployed during the pilot (17%) So even worse than what we've seen so far. 17% dropping out of the labor mar…

And this is a very misleading summary of the results. Here are some actual quote from the study: > Ten respondents moved from unemployment to employment while 32 moved from employment to unemployment. Of the participants who moved from employment to unemployment, 13 (40.6%) enrolled in full-time education during the pilot with the intention of re-entering the labour market later as more qualified workers. Almost half…

Sounds like the participants knew the study was temporary and invested the money in a job they knew they’d need after the study.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#473

Post by free652 » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

minitoar wrote: post #432

free652 wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get that? UBI won't help people that get free housing in NYC UBI doesn't work with HCOL areas.

Where did you get the idea that all current social programs would continue unchanged if something as radical as UBI were introduced?

Because you would cut programs all social programs like medicaid, ssi, section 8 and etc. How would these people live going forward?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#474

Post by munk-a » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #466

refurb wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The logic of it is that you could increase taxes to pay for it and above a certain income level, 100% (or more) of it would be clawed back in taxes.

The required tax rates would still be unbelievably high though. Way higher than any other developed nation (some of whom already have >50% tax rates).

Canada has a tax rate that tops out at 50% (mostly), the US caps out at 37%[1]. I think we'd all be better off if the tax brackets went a lot higher. Rich folks tend to have a lot of inactive money that's just sitting around doing nothing - we can put it to more productive uses.

1. Please note, these numbers are off of raw income tax - both Canada and the US have other employment related taxes that I'm not counting here (like payroll) since their proportional contribution is pretty minimal.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#475

Post by free652 » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

saint_fiasco wrote: post #435

free652 wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get that? UBI won't help people that get free housing in NYC UBI doesn't work with HCOL areas.

Why would anyone sane want to live in NYC anyway, if UBI was a thing? People move to big cities with expensive housing because that's where the well paying jobs are.

Sane? Like a great-grandmother? Would be she insane to live in NYC where is her whole family?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#476

Post by chillacy » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

glennvtx wrote: post #273

No one seems to address the idea that coercion is necessary to force people to pay for this, something i do not wish to do, and many people feel the same. It has already been shown this disincentives work, Those of us that do work and are taxed to pay for the already massively wasteful welfare state resent being enslaved even further to pay for the errors of socialist re-distributive schemes.

You're already being coerced to pay for social services, I wouldn't compare UBI to an anarcho-capitalist paradise, but the current situation, and many UBI proposals are much better than the status quo.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#477

Post by defaultprimate » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

hooande wrote: post #239

sabarn01 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should fear being destitute its the natural human condition. Learning skills is the only way to make wealth.

No person who was born rich has to learn skills to avoid destitution. And poverty isn't the natural condition for humans any more than it is for cats, or any other animal.

That's why 10% of people born in the top quintile fall into the bottom one in adulthood, right?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#478

Post by munk-a » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

minitoar wrote: post #406

free652 wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you wouldn't pay for basic income from your taxes. Where did you get that? It's an extra tax that you are currently not paying.

My understanding of UBI was it’s a replacement for many existing social programs.

I don't think we've seen a serious UBI proposal that can actually replace social benefits - but it'd be nice to see it replace the more targeted benefits (like food stamps and housing benefits) there are some social services (like health insurance) that really are more efficient to just have the government directly funding - as evidenced by the crazy rates Americans tend to pay for what is, elsewhere, a rather modest societal expense.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#479

Post by steveklabnik » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

ssully wrote: post #205

japhyr wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's popular because everybody gets a check each fall that's been around $1500. One year the dividend was higher, just over $2k. There was also an "energy rebate" of $1200 that year, so every qualifying person in the state got $3200 that year. In a family of four, that's over $12k. Large families, for example 8 people, got $24k that year! Some people use it well, putting some in the bank for their kids, paying off lo…

I appreciate your posts on the Permanent Fund here. I have a friend who moved to Alaska last year for work last year and will probably be there for a few more years. We had discussions about the fund recently because this is the first year he qualifies for it. He will very much be in that camp of using the check in the fall to splurge and will do so until he is able to move in a few years. As an outsider, it seems fr…

I feel vaguely similar, having moved to Texas a year ago. No income tax, also money needed for services, when I point this out people just kinda go "oh you crazy new york folks."

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#480

Post by luckylion » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

munk-a wrote: post #402

luckylion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Somebody has to do the work though, until robots do everything (and then declare war on us), you need somebody to take away the garbage, pick the fruits and unclog the toilets. Disincentivizing work doesn't make that go away, it just means you'll put that load on fewer shoulders.

And maybe if those jobs are as unattractive as you imply they should come with higher pay checks. I work in software and love the work that I'm doing - if I was a janitor I'd be miserable and be paid less, so where is the incentive for anyone who can do something else to be a janitor... and the answer is, it isn't there.

Sure, so ... who do we force to do the janitorial work once nobody has to work anymore? Or does the need for it magically vanish? If the answer is "we pay them more", great. We're paying more to janitors, janitorial work gets more expensive, we need to make more to afford it, we need more UBI, janitorial work becomes unattractive.

You'll have to give up a significant part of your (real, not nominal) income to make a difference there. You might be happy to do that, my guess is that most of your peers are not.