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

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

yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 746 posts

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

#241

Post by burrows »

jedberg wrote: post #231
smalltalks wrote: post #217

Technically speaking , many European countries already have "Basic Income". ( France , Sweden , Norway...) They are reserved for individuals "Not Active" though ( Unemployed and not looking for a Job ) over a certain age. Those "BI" massively lower poverty , which usually massively reduce crime-rate , drugs related usage etc... With 700€/Month you aren't gonna far anyway, you have enaugh for food and rent , and that'…

People keep forgetting that a UBI won't cover immigrants. Immigrants would end up doing all the jobs that citizens don't want to do. That's the biggest problem with UBI. It creates a default class system.

If only one country provides UBI to immigrants, that country will see a rise in immigration. At what point do taxes raised from the new residents exceed the money paid out?

Or maybe you're talking about UBI to immigrants, but not actually allowing any immigration.

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

#242

Post by pdonis »

luckylion wrote: post #219
pdonis wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people work more than they need to because they realize that the future is uncertain and having savings will be beneficial if there's trouble at some point in the future. Give the same people a trust fund that takes care of them and that they trust to last for their life time, and most will stop working as hard. They may still work, but much less and most likely on very different things. Where does this "trust…

> Where does this "trust fund" come from? It doesn't just magically appear. I agree completely. People work more than they currently need to because they don't have a trust fund. I'm not arguing that we should give everybody their personal trust fund, I'm explaining why people work and try to save up money even though they don't need those savings in the next 10 minutes.

> I agree completely.

No, you don't. See below.

> People work more than they currently need to because they don't have a trust fund.

No, people work more than they currently need to because they are exercising prudence, common sense, and planning for the future. Which every adult human being is supposed to take responsibility for doing for themselves, and not expect a "trust fund" to magically take care of for them.

You're arguing that if people had a "trust fund", they wouldn't need to plan and save for the future. But no such "trust fund" can exist in the first place unless some people are exercising prudence, common sense, and planning for the future. You can't get rid of uncertainty about the future or the need to plan and allow for it. So, again, you are saying that the people who are going to take responsibility for planning and allowing for that uncertainty are going to be punished by having the fruits of their planning be taken from them to provide a "trust fund" to people who didn't bother to plan and allow for uncertainty.

In other words, you disagree with me completely. I think I should plan for my future, and you should plan for yours. You think I should plan for both our futures, and then you should get to just take resources from me when you need them in the future since it's a "trust fund".

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

#243

Post by BurningFrog »

jedberg wrote: post #182
cheeseomlit wrote: post #136

If the government starts giving me enough money each month to subsist while drastically raising taxes on my earnings from employment then I'll simply stop working. I would imagine most people would do the same.

Every experiment in UBI says otherwise. Direct cash grants usually lead people to do more work, because now they can do the work they enjoy. Also, look around groups of wealthy people. The ones who don't have to work anymore. Sure, some of them live a life of leisure, but many of them still work, because they get bored otherwise.

People will always to things they enjoy. No one questions that.

We have paid employment to get people to do things that need to be done!

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

#244

Post by viklove »

pdonis wrote: post #195
seph-reed wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good for them. The point of work is to not have to anymore so you can follow your passions. We've invented machines that can do basically everything it takes to support human life. Seems like there should be a lot more people following passions now.

> We've invented machines that can do basically everything it takes to support human life. We have? We have machines that can do everything it takes to grow food, prepare it, ship it where it's needed, with no humans? We have machines that can build houses, cars, bicycles, and other forms of transportation, with no humans? We have machines that can make our clothes and all other necessary items with no humans? We hav…

If we really still want them, the law of demand will help us out. The price will go up, and people will start working to be able to afford it.

If it turns out that we don't actually want smartphones, new jeans, Starbucks coffee, etc -- then that's great too. We'll end up with a lot less pointless consumption and people can spend their lives chillin' with their buddies!

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

#245

Post by nogabebop23 »

xwdv wrote: post #212
aintnoprophet wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be true in populated areas. But, what about areas that lag behind? Rural america that is too poor to afford robot trucks. I see people hanging off garbage trucks all the time in the midwestern low pop and rural areas.

Robot trucks are perfect for those areas; cheaper, faster, better.

You're welcome to personally finance south pedoka county's multi-million dollar purchase of robo-garbage trucks. oh, and figure out how that garbage collector can now support themselves.

I realize this runs against the reality of HN, but not all solutions are technology, and not all technology solutions are as simple as "just do X". It's like the "dropbox is just ..." meme turned up to 11

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

#246

Post by formercoder »

bzb3 wrote: post #196
jedberg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every experiment in UBI says otherwise. Direct cash grants usually lead people to do more work, because now they can do the work they enjoy. Also, look around groups of wealthy people. The ones who don't have to work anymore. Sure, some of them live a life of leisure, but many of them still work, because they get bored otherwise.

There are lots of jobs people don't enjoy. Who's going to do those? If they raise the salaries and start getting applicants, who's going to buy the much more expensive produce? They'd have to increase the amount of ubi, and there you have inflation.

Some fold, some raise wages, some invest in automation. Inflation is possible, but not guaranteed.

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

#247

Post by viklove »

luckylion wrote: post #192
slg wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you currently only working just to subsist? Because most people on HN work much harder than they need to and make much more than they need to just to subsist.

You currently don't have the option to not work. Most people work more than they need to because they realize that the future is uncertain and having savings will be beneficial if there's trouble at some point in the future. Give the same people a trust fund that takes care of them and that they trust to last for their life time, and most will stop working as hard. They may still work, but much less and most likely o…

I could subsist while working only 10 hours a week, yet I usually put in 50+. Can you explain what's wrong with me? Or is everyone similar?

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

#248

Post by aisengard »

cheeseomlit wrote: post #136

If the government starts giving me enough money each month to subsist while drastically raising taxes on my earnings from employment then I'll simply stop working. I would imagine most people would do the same.

You know, I thought so too, but I would probably instead just work _less_, maybe half time for half pay, I dunno. Seems like a great way to transform how we think about work and the economy. Fewer hours, when it's by choice, are pretty much always a good thing.

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

#249

Post by viklove »

eanzenberg wrote: post #187
mattbeckman wrote: post #170

UBI (in the U.S.) would be like printing more shares of a publicly-traded stock and giving all of the new stock to the employees of the company. USD is the reserve currency, so foreign interests (or large corps) w/ stockpiles of USD will be the losers due to inflation. Foreign interests can change which reserve currency they use at-will, so wouldn't this be like a direct-fee/dividend U.S. citizens (or any UBI-country…

So overall dilution of the currency. Then, increase UBI some more to make up for it. Then, dilute the currency some more. Over a few cycles become the new Venezuela as most entrepreneurs leave for greener fields.

Easy solution -- we stop the process of QE and replace it with a UBI. Why is dilution OK in the name of big corps but the next incarnation of Hitler when it's for you and I?

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

#250

Post by thisiszilff »

WalterBright wrote: post #215
seph-reed wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good for them. The point of work is to not have to anymore so you can follow your passions. We've invented machines that can do basically everything it takes to support human life. Seems like there should be a lot more people following passions now.

> The point of work is to not have to anymore so you can follow your passions. So Bob needs to work so Fred can follow his passion for surfing and video games?

If Bob is a machine, then yes!
Post reply on HN