Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 474 posts

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#301

Post by JDiculous »

jimmysacks wrote: post #288
JDiculous wrote: post #242

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery. UBI isn't just about liberty and accelerating ourselves forward (though it's also about that), it's a statement that no matter how dire your circumstances, no matter how useless you are seen to our corporate overlords and private employers, that you belong t…

Its allowed to continue because some are mentally Ill and refuse to get treated (and we can't force them into treatment) and some make poor life decisions like having multiple children with no means to support them (you have the freedom to do this). You can't just give money to someone mentally Ill or will just squander the money and continue to make bad decisions. We will still have just as much poverty and homeless…

Are you kidding me? We literally dump our mental health patients on the streets. [1]

How many of the homeless in SF/NYC that you see have kids with them?

The mental gymnastics people go through to justify homelessness and poverty is sickening.

https://www.kqed.org/news/10737399/nevada-to-pay-san-francis...

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#302

Post by lanevorockz »

JDiculous wrote: post #242

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery. UBI isn't just about liberty and accelerating ourselves forward (though it's also about that), it's a statement that no matter how dire your circumstances, no matter how useless you are seen to our corporate overlords and private employers, that you belong t…

I believe you haven't worked with homeless people much, but the problem with homeless is NOT poverty. People that have the tendency be homeless are people that don't find their place in society, the lack of order actually brings them relief.

Hard problem to solve and it wouldn't be fixed by universal income. We tried convincing homeless people to go into shelters or to at least care a bit for themselves ( free self catered infrastructure like showers ). Best solution so far is a social one where people help them find a new sense of achievement and a place in society. Drugs is also a big problem and probably where all the money from universal income would go to.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#303

Post by Guest42 »

sub7 wrote: post #254
JDiculous wrote: post #242

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery. UBI isn't just about liberty and accelerating ourselves forward (though it's also about that), it's a statement that no matter how dire your circumstances, no matter how useless you are seen to our corporate overlords and private employers, that you belong t…

Agreed that everyone deserves a basic standard of living as a human right but disagree that UBI is the path to that. Giving money to people instantly creates a class of beggars. Beggars with voting rights will vote for people who give them more and more and more for no more work. It's the road to ruin. My suggestion is a set of hospitals, schools and housing that is super basic but sufficient to give people dignity a…

A very strange and inaccurate philosophy.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#304

Post by charlesu »

sub7 wrote: post #284
zentiggr wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny that you say a class of beggars would be created, when most UBI scenarios I've read about show that people tend to try to improve their situations in whichever way makes the most sense... some who can finally afford basic water food and housing start seeking medical/psych help they couldn't afford. Some get more schooling to improve their employment prospects. Some buy a car to start saving themselves hour…

I really want capitalism to give you a wage to do all those things. I understand it's been cronified and monopoloies have fucked over a whole lot of people. The real fix is to fix capitalism, not write you a check every month for being born. We need to enforce fair markets, fair wages etc. For those at the very bottom, I want dignity, a free education, and if still unsuccessful access to a low skill job that can pay…

Should we pay people to dig ditches and then fill them just so that they're working? The relative gap between high skilled and unskilled labor will only increase. At some point, a large portion of society's labor will become worthless. What then?

Capitalism is about the accumulation and use of capital. It's amoral. It doesn't care about the unemployment rate, poverty rate, or health outcomes. It is just fine with child labor and seven day work weeks. It will offshore labor, hire contractors, and use money for buybacks before investment if the numbers make sense. Capitalism is not the answer here. Policy is. And that's fine. We can have both.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#305

Post by zeveb »

JDiculous wrote: post #231
Proziam wrote: post #88

My primary concern with UBI is not the concept itself, but the risk for people in power to use it against the people. Once UBI exists, people will rely on it for survival. It will be the single most influential campaign topic. Worse, if UBI were to get 'Obamacared' then we'd end up with a massive battle over implementation, followed by a much worse system than the one we had prior (worst of all worlds with numerous '…

> but the risk for people in power to use it against the people. As opposed to what, private undemocratic unaccountable authoritarian institutions controlling peoples' lives? > nce UBI exists, people will rely on it for survival. Anybody who's dependent on their employers' paycheck is dependent on their employer for survival. How is dependence on the government any more dangerous than being dependent on a corporation…

> As opposed to what, private undemocratic unaccountable authoritarian institutions controlling peoples' lives?

Which is more authoritarian: 50%+1 of the people with the legal authority to imprison or kill you, or hundreds of competing firms bidding for your business or labour?

I can easily see a government abusing UBI, just like the U.S. federal government has abused highway funding e.g. to extort the states into raising the drinking age.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#306

Post by JDiculous »

sub7 wrote: post #254
JDiculous wrote: post #242

One day we will look at all the homelessness and blatant poverty in our society we allow in absolute disgust, similar to the repulsion people feel about slavery. UBI isn't just about liberty and accelerating ourselves forward (though it's also about that), it's a statement that no matter how dire your circumstances, no matter how useless you are seen to our corporate overlords and private employers, that you belong t…

Agreed that everyone deserves a basic standard of living as a human right but disagree that UBI is the path to that. Giving money to people instantly creates a class of beggars. Beggars with voting rights will vote for people who give them more and more and more for no more work. It's the road to ruin. My suggestion is a set of hospitals, schools and housing that is super basic but sufficient to give people dignity a…

> Beggars with voting rights will vote for people who give them more and more

Given that UBI increases would be coupled with tax increases, I don't actually see that being the case.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#307

Post by pozdnyshev »

asdkhadsj wrote: post #286
clSTophEjUdRanu wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I look at it from a selfish perspective. These "lowlifes" actually drag society down. It benefits me if they are helped.

Yup. I don't agree on the perspective but you're totally right. My wife works in a state with issues like this, and her very modest city (capitol, but not as big as SF or Seattle) has enough homeless people that all sorts of crime is on the rise. Restaurants were closing (before COVID..) because people wouldn't go to the restaurant anymore. There were literal camps in parking lots and the police did nothing. I person…

The American Prison system is the largest healthcare provider in the United States. 2 million people with mental illness are put in jails/prisons every year.

We need not only social programs, but to bring back the institutions. State mental hospitals where these people can actually get the care they need and not be subjected to the harsh conditions of our penitentiaries.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#308

Post by sojournerc »

Goronmon wrote: post #300
sub7 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patronizing and counter productive is giving people money for nothing. It's telling people that they're useless. You should read up on the beggar networks in India and the exploitation that occurs when you handout money for no work.

Patronizing and counter productive is giving people money for nothing. It's telling people that they're useless. I would disagree that a person "use" is defined solely by the type of job they have.

People need purpose to find fulfillment. Free money does not give one purpose or meaning. That's what I took GP to be saying

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#309

Post by dangravell »

sub7 wrote: post #284
zentiggr wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny that you say a class of beggars would be created, when most UBI scenarios I've read about show that people tend to try to improve their situations in whichever way makes the most sense... some who can finally afford basic water food and housing start seeking medical/psych help they couldn't afford. Some get more schooling to improve their employment prospects. Some buy a car to start saving themselves hour…

I really want capitalism to give you a wage to do all those things. I understand it's been cronified and monopoloies have fucked over a whole lot of people. The real fix is to fix capitalism, not write you a check every month for being born. We need to enforce fair markets, fair wages etc. For those at the very bottom, I want dignity, a free education, and if still unsuccessful access to a low skill job that can pay…

> The real fix is to fix capitalism, not write you a check every month for being born.

You write that as if it's some kind of natural law, as if the second clause is _obviously_ more absurd than the first. It's that the case and, if so, why?

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#310

Post by look_lookatme »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #41
dmix wrote: post #15

Didn’t George W Bush send a cheque out to every American? I figured that’s what Romney had in mind more than full scale UBI.

Yes and most of it was spent on paying off debt rather than buying tvs and iPods to stimulate the economy. I know I put my check into my savings account and didn't think about it again.

Isn't that the biggest goal right now? Maintaining a healthy banking and housing system by subsidizing rent, mortgages, debt payments etc? $1000 a month doesn't seem like a stimulus, it seems like a bridge to the other side.
Post reply on HN