What If Andrew Yang Was Right? • Hacker News Board

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#21

Post by bogidon » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:07 AM UTC

aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

This Medium article that addresses this point has been pretty wildly shared throughout his campaign: https://medium.com/basic-income/wouldnt-unconditional-basic-...

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#22

Post by wenc » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:07 AM UTC

RedneckBob wrote: post #12

timw4mail wrote: post #6

I don't see how a universal basic income could be sustainable in any way. You either have debt hyperinflation, or you have taxes high enough that the universal basic income is meaningless.

"you have taxes high enough that the universal basic income is meaningless." Not true. You should read the UBI policy proposal that Yang created for his POTUS run. You can find them here: - https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/ - https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/

This article [1] is one of the few to have taken Andrew Yang's UBI policies seriously and on their merits (unlike most others that summarily dismiss them), thought through some of their implications, found shortcomings, but still ended up still largely acknowledging that they could work.

I think a well-designed UBI could work. The tricky part is that UBI is one of those experiments that has to be done on the large, and pulling back if it doesn't work out is challenging. Any errors in implementation and design are potentially very expensive.

[1] https://theweek.com/articles/858097/andrew-yangs-ubi-problem

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#23

Post by uk_programmer » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

> Yes, there are people that do exactly that, and probably will for all time. Has it ruined the Australian economy? nope. Has there been rampant inflation? nope.

It is besides the point really isn't it? Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind?

Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to paying 40% of my income to tax at the moment and I've been saving for a property for years (I earn too much to have any help on buying a flat). What the studies say is absolutely irrelevant because I cannot abide the (lack of) principle itself.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#24

Post by mrfusion » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

eachro wrote: post #5

aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

I wonder if there are any economic studies on whether social security increased inflation when it was first enacted. It's not the ideal comparison because of the sheer scale of UBI vs social security but it would be something to get notion of the impact.

Why would it increase inflation? An equal amount of money is taken out of taxes. There’s no new money being created.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#25

Post by majormajor » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:10 AM UTC

uk_programmer wrote: post #23

grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

> Yes, there are people that do exactly that, and probably will for all time. Has it ruined the Australian economy? nope. Has there been rampant inflation? nope. It is besides the point really isn't it? Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind? Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to paying 40% of my income to tax at the moment and I've been saving for a property for yea…

> Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to 40% tax at the moment and I've been saving for a house for years (I earn too much to have any help on buying a flat). What the studies say is absolutely irrelevant because I cannot abide the principle.

You're gonna pay one way or another... Some costs will be more monetary, some will be more health/crime-related, etc, but very few of us live in countries where there is a general desire and will to force people to work.

What exactly do you suggest as the alternative?

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#26

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:12 AM UTC

datashow wrote: post #17

grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

[deleted]

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#27

Post by uk_programmer » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:13 AM UTC

majormajor wrote: post #25

uk_programmer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, there are people that do exactly that, and probably will for all time. Has it ruined the Australian economy? nope. Has there been rampant inflation? nope. It is besides the point really isn't it? Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind? Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to paying 40% of my income to tax at the moment and I've been saving for a property for yea…

> Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to 40% tax at the moment and I've been saving for a house for years (I earn too much to have any help on buying a flat). What the studies say is absolutely irrelevant because I cannot abide the principle. You're gonna pay one way or another... Some costs will be more monetary, some will be more health/crime-related, etc, but very few of us live in countrie…

> You're gonna pay one way or another.

Only because nonsense like this is allowed.

> Some costs will be more monetary, some will be more health/crime-related, etc, but very few of us live in countries where there is a general desire and will to force people to work.

You should be looking for work. If you haven't tried looking for a job you get your benefits removed. Obviously the Elderly and Disabled should get help but healthy people should be looking for work if they aren't employed.

> What exactly do you suggest as the alternative?

Get a job.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#28

Post by grecy » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:17 AM UTC

uk_programmer wrote: post #23

grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

> Yes, there are people that do exactly that, and probably will for all time. Has it ruined the Australian economy? nope. Has there been rampant inflation? nope. It is besides the point really isn't it? Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind? Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to paying 40% of my income to tax at the moment and I've been saving for a property for yea…

> It (inflation) is besides the point really isn't it?

Rampant inflation or the idea that nobody would go to work are commonly held up as big reasons not to have a UBI (or something similar) so it's important to address those.

> Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind?

There are a host of reasons, here's a few off my head:

- We accept there will always be people we will pay to sit on their behind (disabled, elderly, mentally ill, students going to university, veterans, retired government employees, etc.). It's important to recognize we already pay a huge number of people (about 5 million, or 20% of Australians according to one of my links above) to "sit on their behind"

- It gets them off the street and therefore not out committing crimes.

- Because you're happy doing what you're doing (going to work, I presume) and those people are happy doing what they're doing (nothing). So everyone is happy right now. If you force them to go to work you'll be unhappy because you'll spend all your time forcing them, and dealing with other massive societal problems like crime, and they'll be unhappy because you're making them go to work when they don't want to. So you would reduce happiness by forcing them to go to work. Also likely they'll do a terrible job at whatever work you force them to do, which is not good for society.

If you want to rebut that last point by saying "but I'm not happy (going to work)" then there is an extremely simple answer - Quit. Get the free money and do nothing all the time. Of course I already know you won't do that because it won't make you happy, and you don't want to live on $1k a month (it's good enough, but not great). Plenty of people actually do try it for a while (I did)... and then they come back to paid work again because overall for 95% of people (as proved by evidence) life is better.

Everyone is already doing what makes them happy, so leave it alone.

Remember, US tax payers are spending literally trillions of dollars on wars and bailing out banks (again)... would you rather the Australian government spend those tax dollars that way, or spend it on improving the lives of Australians who are in Australia?

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#29

Post by wenc » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:18 AM UTC

datashow wrote: post #17

grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

You might now know this if you live in North America because Australia hardly enters our consciousness or our news cycles, but in many parts of the world Australia has a reputation of being a very innovative country, especially in physical engineering and software. Part of it has to do with their anti-authoritarian heritage and survivalist mindset--they don't take hierarchy too seriously. Whether their creativity is helped by a generous welfare society or not, I'm not sure, but you definitely can't say Australians aren't innovative.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#30

Post by justchilly » Tue, Mar 17, 2020, 1:21 AM UTC

qqqwerty wrote: post #13

aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

Inflation is a non-issue. Economic growth has largely been constrained by demand, not supply. And the modern economy is saturated with replacement goods. If the demand for milk goes up, I can switch to soy milk. If soy milk goes up, I can switch to Almond. And if all of them go up, I just drink water. Once most basic needs are met, inflation looses its power with a few exceptions. The financialization of our economy…

Not sure I follow how the milk as a substitute for water analogy translates to housing. There are no substitutes for housing in desirable areas. When the entire working class suddenly has more income, it doesn't create more housing, it pushes up the price of housing. Sure we could build more, but why? After all, if the price of affordable housing goes up, so does less affordable housing, and luxury housing. And we end up in the same place, except with inflation.