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

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

#601

Post by DubiousPusher » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:15 PM UTC

zazaalaza wrote: post #506

DubiousPusher wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Letting workers leave abusive employment situations is a benefit of UBI. UBI might even totally reorient the idea of work in that now an employer has the incentive to keep workers happy that must be balanced with the profit incentive.

UBI would reorient the idea of work in the sense that new generations won't think about work the way we do, for them it will be something that you can do, not something you have to do. Similarly how sport is today, you can do sports but you don't have to. Also with UBI you are guaranteed a certain amount of income for the duration of your life. You can go to a bank and take a loan against your UBI. A big portion of t…

That's not necessarily true. Work ethic is not derived only from the notion that people need to work. It is derived from an ethical imperative and from a sense of achievement people get from work. Also, any UBI would likely be well under the amount of money necessary to live a middle class life. I myself was on SSI and could have found a way to subsist on it but really did not want to live that way. I got to know a lot of other people on SSI as well and they mostly felt the same. Most were looking for a way to make enough money to get off government assistance. This was substantially affected by the fact that the government takes 50 cents for every dollar you make. For me, living in Montana, this meant I could go to work for $5.15/hour minimum wage. I could earn $40 a day and lose $20 from my benefit. If you want to talk about a benefit system designed to disincentive work you'd have a hard time inventimg a better one than we have now.

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

#602

Post by ChrisLomont » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:15 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #375

ChrisLomont wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc Less work means less is produced, so society as a whole becomes poorer. There's simply less goods. Less produced also shrinks the tax base, so tax rates must be raised to continue to pay for the basic income. Higher taxes would then dissuade more people from working, or leading them also to work less. Now there's mo…

> Less produced also shrinks the tax base, so tax rates must be raised to continue to pay for the basic income. Higher taxes would then dissuade more people from working, or leading them also to work less. Now there's more people wanting basic income, so more needs raised...... This works the opposite of that. Everyone always gets the basic income, so there is no "more people wanting", but if the tax base was hypothe…

>This works the opposite of that. Everyone always gets the basic income, so there is no "more people wanting"

?????

Less time worked correlates with less things made. Less things made means less sales. Less sales means less sales tax. Less people working means less income. Less income means less income tax....

Sure this doesn't shrink the tax base? After all, when a few percent of people are put out of work during a recession, there are severe tax revenue issues. Basic income experiments so far show that 10% of people simply drop out of the workforce.....

>if the tax base was hypothetically reduced then less revenue would be generated to fund the UBI. At a lower UBI amount, more people would work. It's self-balancing.

So your UBI pays people a fixed percent of the tax base, not a dollar amount? So during a recession, those UBI people will get really screwed....

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

#603

Post by tic_tac » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:23 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…

The point of UBI is not to fund people's vanity adventures in education. It's to support people who would otherwise be starving or homeless without a job.

Regarding "sickness", the severity is important to know. If UBI enables people with slight depression issues to just give up working entirely, UBI could be entirely counterproductive by accelerating depression's spirals of inactivity.

And this completely ignored the issue of inflation that comes with society wide UBI.

The whole notion of UBI is nonsense. Rather than throwing money at people to spend on broken institutions like Education and Healthcare, let's reform these institutions in the first place to make them more affordable and effective.

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

#604

Post by pault » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

mfer wrote: post #237

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…

I know and know of many people who don't want to work or contribute to society. Sitting at home and not contributing to society is kind of a goal. Some groups are negative to those who try to work or contribute. I know families who have passed that on from parents to children. This isn't everyone but it is a segment. I don't see much talk about this. The folks in this segment aren't bound to be on HN. I point this ou…

Would the world be worse off if people who have no interest in working and will siphon off as much money as they can from their employer until they get fired left the workforce? Those jobs would be freed up for people that actually want them.

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

#605

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

entropicdrifter wrote: post #582

WalterBright wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know anyone who would be less likely to be successful as a result of UBI. I have an acquaintance who works at min wage jobs just long enough to qualify for unemployment, then he manages to get laid off. He lives off the unemployment until it runs out, then gets another min wage job, and the cycle repeats as long as I've known him. He's quite content with this arrangement.

Wouldn't he be more successful with UBI, then? He would likely overall save the corporations he's being employed on and off by money by reducing their turnover. Also, it's likely most low wage jobs would have their wages increase because there would be less fear of unionizing if striking meant that nobody would be going hungry. Thus, UBI can reduce the degree of low wage exploitation at both the worker's side (gettin…

> Wouldn't he be more successful with UBI, then?

How would he be more successful by not working at all?

> He would likely overall save the corporations he's being employed on and off by money by reducing their turnover.

Businesses are used to high turnover with lower paid employees. It's ok, though, because their jobs tend to be interchangeable and easy for someone new to get up to speed on.

> win-win

The lose part is supporting people who would otherwise work and contribute to the economy. I don't know many people, but the fact that I personally know several that would not work if they didn't have to means that there are likely plenty of them. (I'm talking about able-bodied adults without dependents.)

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

#606

Post by AnthonyMouse » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

ChrisLomont wrote: post #602

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Less produced also shrinks the tax base, so tax rates must be raised to continue to pay for the basic income. Higher taxes would then dissuade more people from working, or leading them also to work less. Now there's more people wanting basic income, so more needs raised...... This works the opposite of that. Everyone always gets the basic income, so there is no "more people wanting", but if the tax base was hypothe…

>This works the opposite of that. Everyone always gets the basic income, so there is no "more people wanting" ????? Less time worked correlates with less things made. Less things made means less sales. Less sales means less sales tax. Less people working means less income. Less income means less income tax.... Sure this doesn't shrink the tax base? After all, when a few percent of people are put out of work during a…

> ?????

Everyone gets the UBI, not just people who don't work. If hypothetically fewer people were to work, more people wouldn't start receiving it because everybody gets it either way.

> Less time worked correlates with less things made.

In general this goes the other way. The history of progress is to make more stuff in less time. If people had more "disincentive to work" then companies would have to pay them more -- which increases the incentive for automation, which creates more stuff with less people working, which solves the problem.

This is also why your "disincentive to work" calculations are off. If you pay incentive to work that keeps people working. It also increases wages (and correspondingly spending), which increases the tax base, so there goes that too.

> So your UBI pays people a fixed percent of the tax base, not a dollar amount? So during a recession, those UBI people will get really screwed....

Taxes are (approximately) a percent of GDP, not a percent of the stock market. Have a look at the GDP graph:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDP

Difference from the height of the housing boom to the bottom of the crash was ~3%. Not a huge difference. And it was back to where it was at the height after one year. (Compare to ~50% drop for the Dow. The stock market is not the economy.)

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

#607

Post by hinkley » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

Proziam wrote: post #581

hinkley wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present; the result being that he does not live in the present or the future; he lives as if he is never going to die, and then dies having never really lived."

You're describing my dad perfectly. He worked as much as I do (plus he was doing hard physical labor...) until he died of cancer in 2009. He's the reason I dedicated myself to work as much as I could as early as I could, so I could get myself to a point of financial independence. He never got to enjoy his retirement because he sacrificed his life to adopt me, so I feel a sense of urgency to enjoy life as much as I ca…

That is a Dalai Lama quote, and it's the only one that has really stuck with me.

It's so true it hurts.

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

#608

Post by godelski » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

tic_tac wrote: post #603

multiplegeorges wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The point of UBI is not to fund people's vanity adventures in education. It's to support people who would otherwise be starving or homeless without a job. Regarding "sickness", the severity is important to know. If UBI enables people with slight depression issues to just give up working entirely, UBI could be entirely counterproductive by accelerating depression's spirals of inactivity. And this completely ignored th…

> The point of UBI is not to fund people's vanity adventures in education. It's to support people who would otherwise be starving or homeless without a job.

Who gave this strict definition. In my opinion, the point of UBI is to benefit society. I do think people being more educated benefits society as a whole, and thus I think people using their UBI on this is beneficial.

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

#609

Post by einpoklum » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

tic_tac wrote: post #603

multiplegeorges wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The point of UBI is not to fund people's vanity adventures in education. It's to support people who would otherwise be starving or homeless without a job. Regarding "sickness", the severity is important to know. If UBI enables people with slight depression issues to just give up working entirely, UBI could be entirely counterproductive by accelerating depression's spirals of inactivity. And this completely ignored th…

So, education is a "vanity adventure"?

Perhaps if you're a person who looks at your cleaners or servers or cashiers as people with no potential for self-betterment; as people who are unable to expand their horizons.

Ugh.

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

#610

Post by biql » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

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…

Not necessarily if you account for the fact that people's expenses increase as soon as their income increase. Before UBI, they might want certain type of hobbies, a certain type of house, etc, and after UBI the same people might want more expensive hobbies, a bigger house, and so on. Even without UBI, many could choose less demanding jobs with more free time, lower salaries, and in less expensive cities, but they don't.