Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income • Hacker News Board

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#41

Post by toohotatopic » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:51 PM UTC

throwaway_jobs wrote: post #5

I don’t think there is any good way to test UBI at any small scale, I think there needs to be a critical mass of people who can pay their housing and food costs how society and economic activity would be reshaped under such a system.

Why do you need a critical mass? Everybody with an income can try it at any given moment:

Find one or more persons who _you_ want to support and support them with a basic income. If UBI works, they will also start supporting other people. Sooner or later, you have an economy of people who support each other with UBI.

Chances are that you are unlucky and your choice of seeding persons wasn't good. But for science, that doesn't matter. If others copy that approach, sooner or later, a working economy will emerge - if UBI works.

There is no need to establish UBI in an area even though it helps. Thanks to the internet, the economic connections can all be organized online.

*edit: marked the _you_

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#42

Post by macspoofing » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:54 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #32

exabrial wrote: post #8

Which is incredibly charitable! Opponents to UBI only oppose the income source being tax; which is a forced wealth transfer (opposite of my money my choice).

I'm a leftist person who isn't an opponent of ubi, but is an opponent of Yang's ubi. I have no problem with raising taxes, but I do have other concerns. Namely, if everyone got $x,xxx a month, how do we ensure that rents don't just go up by that amount or wages don't go down by that amount? I worry that without a well thought out plan, UBI just ends up funneling money directly back to the wealthy (eg, landlords and b…

>how do we ensure that rents don't just go up by that amount or wages don't go down by that amount?

Two ways to answer this:

1) If you're printing money, then yes, prices will rise, and if price controls are implemented it will lead to shortages (e.g. Venezuela)

2) If you're not printing money, then competition will simply lower the cost. It's the same as today - outside of terrible policies like rent-control, why don't landlords just raise rents by $5000? Because the renters will leave and rent from a landlord that undercuts the crazy landlord. In the market, profits tend to 0 and if profits are too high more supply will come in to get a cut of the profits. It's not magic.

>BI just ends up funneling money directly back to the wealthy (eg, landlords and business owners).

Your view on reality is skewed. I mean, yes, people will buy products and services from landlords and business owners. That's not 'funnelling money' anywhere, that's just buying products and services. What do you think people will do with that money, if not to buy things they want and/or need.

>I'm not convinced yet that Yang has a thorough enough plan here.

For sure. UBI does not solve anything and is unworkable, but not for the reasons you stated.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#43

Post by MiroF » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:54 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #21

Infinitesimus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VCs primarily care about outsized monetary returns and you don't get that from giving money to people. Tax-deductible charitable donations are probably the closest way to incentivize the private sector but VCs was more, not just to stay flat and most businesses don't make decisions for "the greater good" over more $$. Can you think of a way to incentivize private experiments in UBI?

> Can you think of a way to incentivize private experiments in UBI? Contracts that guarantee the recipient will pay X% of their income to the UBI source over the next Y years. Claims are that people's creative and productive power will be unleashed. If true, their income will rise dramatically, and they'll pay lots of "taxes" back to the UBI source.

So.. loans, but with way shittier terms for the borrower?

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#44

Post by ravenstine » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:55 PM UTC

I don't understand the optimism around UBI. UBI is a band-aid and a sign that a system is actually failing. I get why some people, especially intellectuals, want UBI, but they seem to believe that UBI is free of consequence. If society "needs" UBI, that means that not enough people can build wealth or that the welfare system isn't effective. Handing people money isn't going to change the fact that too much of the economy is bolstered by massive amounts of debt. UBI may just perpetuate the problem and encourage more debt to be taken out. One argument for UBI I've heard is that places like Alaska give their residents a "dividend" of something between a few hundred to a few thousand bucks. But the reason Alaska can do this is because they effectively own their oil industry, and their GDP far exceeds their debt, whereas the United States federal government(as well as many states) have debt that exceeds their GDP.

UBI will be needed when automation actually destroys enough jobs where it makes sense. I don't know that we're quite there yet, but it will happen soon. Wanting UBI before its time seems like an admission of failure oh the system.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#45

Post by JoeSmithson » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:55 PM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #10

What is the actual case for Basic Income? I hear that it 'solves' the problem of automation ... except that it doesn't actually solve it AT ALL. If automation will lead to high unemployment, basic income will do nothing for that. It will send cash to people who aren't working so they can provide for basic necessities, but our welfare state already does that. And we know that segments of society that are wholly depend…

For one, it removes pathological situations where people are disincentivised to work because it would mean they lose means-tested support.

The great unknown is whether it also disincentivises work itself in a way that would be a negative overall.

The general idea is that it removes the threat of poverty, which potentially allows people to make more rational decisions, and negates the need for cruder solutions like minimum wage, regulations, unions etc.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#46

Post by ImprobableTruth » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:56 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #32

exabrial wrote: post #8

Which is incredibly charitable! Opponents to UBI only oppose the income source being tax; which is a forced wealth transfer (opposite of my money my choice).

I'm a leftist person who isn't an opponent of ubi, but is an opponent of Yang's ubi. I have no problem with raising taxes, but I do have other concerns. Namely, if everyone got $x,xxx a month, how do we ensure that rents don't just go up by that amount or wages don't go down by that amount? I worry that without a well thought out plan, UBI just ends up funneling money directly back to the wealthy (eg, landlords and b…

Do you believe welfare is similar in that regard? If not, why?

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#47

Post by bslyke » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:56 PM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #10

What is the actual case for Basic Income? I hear that it 'solves' the problem of automation ... except that it doesn't actually solve it AT ALL. If automation will lead to high unemployment, basic income will do nothing for that. It will send cash to people who aren't working so they can provide for basic necessities, but our welfare state already does that. And we know that segments of society that are wholly depend…

Our welfare state has gaps where non-workers, who should be supported by welfare, are still getting screwed. I thought this paper on the subject was interesting: https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2020/01/20/how-to-fix-o...

Seems like UBI fills in the gaps in a sloppy easy way, while also giving money to workers, who don't truly 'need' the welfare. It frees them from the chains of being stuck at their job, but universal healthcare would probably do a much better job at that for the worst-stuck people (e.g. hate my job but I have a chronic illness with monthly costs > a potential UBI).

Maybe give welfare a cool silicon valley style name instead of the one with baggage and Jack Dorsey will get on-board.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#48

Post by MiroF » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:57 PM UTC

Proven wrote: post #16

throwaway_jobs wrote: post #5

I don’t think there is any good way to test UBI at any small scale, I think there needs to be a critical mass of people who can pay their housing and food costs how society and economic activity would be reshaped under such a system.

Really? Just like Krugman's QE! How am I going to get back my devalued savings once we find out it doesn't work, all savers have been ruined and fiat money has no value? There's no need to test it on any scale, including small, because it can't work.

The central bank exists to ensure that your fears here are misplaced.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#49

Post by chrisseaton » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:58 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #35

chrisseaton wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like nonsense to me to say 'this is universal income just except it's not universal.' If you take away the 'universal' then you're missing the entire point.

This is policy and PR hacking in lieu of having incredibly deep pockets. Sorry to tell you that real life is messy. Think of it as growth hacking. This is a sales endeavor. You must sell that the current form of capitalism is fundamentally broken. This is no different than contributing to the "right" Congressional candidates with few dollars so they control hundreds of billions of dollars of policy (or in this case,…

But you can’t prove anything about universal income without the universal part. As without it it’s not the same thing and we don’t know if it’ll have the same effects.

Re: Jack Dorsey is giving Andrew Yang $5M to build the case for a basic income

#50

Post by sokoloff » Thu, May 21, 2020, 1:59 PM UTC

toohotatopic wrote: post #41

throwaway_jobs wrote: post #5

I don’t think there is any good way to test UBI at any small scale, I think there needs to be a critical mass of people who can pay their housing and food costs how society and economic activity would be reshaped under such a system.

Why do you need a critical mass? Everybody with an income can try it at any given moment: Find one or more persons who _you_ want to support and support them with a basic income. If UBI works, they will also start supporting other people. Sooner or later, you have an economy of people who support each other with UBI. Chances are that you are unlucky and your choice of seeding persons wasn't good. But for science, tha…

UBI is no good if it's not durable and reliable to the recipient.

If you imagine that UBI would allow people to live with a lower level of stress around starvation, you have to imagine that they would want to rely on that income a decade from now. Saying "find a rich benefactor to decide to give money away" doesn't reasonably test anything meaningful about UBI. I can tell you that people will generally be happier if you give them money one time. Don't need much experimentation to validate that hypothesis...