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

291–300 of 746 posts

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

#291

Post by klmadfejno »

JoeSmithson wrote: post #61
macspoofing wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it removes pathological situations where people are disincentivised to work because it would mean they lose means-tested support. That's a problem with how welfare is structured, that can be fixed with changing welfare. >The great unknown is whether it also disincentivises work itself in a way that would be a negative overall Why would you think it wouldn't? >which potentially allows people to make more rational dec…

> "That's a problem with how welfare is structured, that can be fixed with changing welfare." That's what UBI is...? UBI is changing welfare to not be means-tested. > "Why would you think it wouldn't?" There are many reasons to think it wouldn't. For example, lots of people work two jobs. People work full time when they could work part time. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos etc all still work. The vast majority of people in a…

> There are many reasons to think it wouldn't. For example, lots of people work two jobs. People work full time when they could work part time. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos etc all still work. The vast majority of people in a modern economy work more than they need to in order to earn what a UBI would pay.

Bill Gates works, but he doesn't work as a janitor. Who is going to scrub the toilets for a meager supplement to a guaranteed living wage?

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

#292

Post by JoeAltmaier »

Ididntdothis wrote: post #133
drunkonpappy wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say that at all He alluded to how those systems being over-regulated and broken prevent the usual economic factors from working. E.g. if you don't allow people to build new houses in certain places then that makes it quite easy for housing prices to go up in those areas

Then let’s fix those first before talking about UBI.

Or not. Because folks are hurting now. And with UBI they might be able to move to more affordable locations anyway, which helps solve the other problem right there.

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

#293

Post by grayfaced »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #256

>> Yang says Humanity Forward plans to immediately distribute Dorsey’s contribution in the form of small cash grants of $250 to nearly 20,000 people who’ve lost their jobs or taken an economic hit as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic So money based on certain non-universal conditions? Isn't this one of the root problems? People cannot accept a truly universal system - you've already got too much; that guy lives in th…

Even universal has winners and losers. How do you deal with different cost of livings between Bay Area and Mississippi?

If the UBI is not adjusted and covers living expenses in cheap areas but not expensive areas, then people might decide to live cheaply without a job. That risks creating slums.

If it's adjusted to locality, then areas will grow and dwindle based on accuracy of those adjustment tables. Which would turn those tables overtly political.

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

#294

Post by bermanoid »

rsync wrote: post #286

Why doesn't he just fund this experiment himself ? From wikipedia: "Originally a corporate lawyer, Yang began working in various startups and early stage growth companies as a founder or executive from 2000 to 2009." Maybe this a matching donation from Dorsey ?

Never fund yourself what someone with 100x the money will fund for you.

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

#295

Post by Nasrudith »

kerkeslager wrote: post #257

While I think UBI is one of the better solutions to the poverty problem in the US, I think almost any solution to poverty will fall prey to inflation if we don't address income inequality. One way to do this is pay ratio caps at companies. It's pretty hard to argue against this: if you really believe that wealth trickles down, then you should have no problem trusting but verifying that.

I don't see the connection between inflation and inequality. Inflation is relative currency growth vs true economy size and productivity.

Pay ratio caps don't seem that productive in several ways. For one humans are tricky in that they don't just lie down and accept the laws you want that go against what they want and instead undermine and loophole it in ingenius ways. Trivially that would encourage "nesting doll tiered" subsidary companies and contractors to bypass the limits.

Second the high end of income wouldn't even be affected as they make their money largely from investments not salary or wages. Even if they got the seed for investments from their high salaries - like every retired athlete who managed to stay rich and even get richer after endorsements dried up.

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

#296

Post by anonAndOn »

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.

Doesn't that happen in the US already? Farm work, hotel cleaning, groundskeeping... all heavily reliant upon immigrant labor.

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

#297

Post by ethanbond »

gist wrote: post #116
dang wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's Yang's answer about that? If he had a FAQ that would certainly be on it.

As a landlord [1] I can answer that question. Btw, I have not found any UBI proponent addressing it either (they tend to avoid that with economic speak if at all) [2] Rent will go up. All you have to do is look what happens in 'hot' markets (SFO/NYC/Bay Area) where there are so many dollars floating around. [1] Both commercial and residential but not in a hot market a 'normal' market. [2] Including Yang

People are actually downvoting the idea that rents will rise as high as the market allows? Hilarious.

Rent rises when: there are high paying jobs around (SF, NYC); there is public investment (subway stations, schools, parks); or, yes, when everyone stumbles across an extra $1k/month (UBI).

All of these mean "the market" (aka tenants) is able to pay a higher price, therefore landlords raise their prices and capture it.

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

#298

Post by asdff »

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.

You are assuming a business and industry is a god given right. If a business fails to get applicants, they need to raise wages or relocate to where there is labor. If they need more income to pay for these workers then they will charge more. If the price they charge for their goods or services is too high for the given level of demand, the business will just fold.

And that's OK, there area a lot of parasitic zombie companies around that could use a culling, wasting peoples working years doing inane tasks rather than starting a project of their own and innovating. As they say, imagine if Mozart never held a violin but was busy working double shifts flipping burgers for 30 years instead.

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

#299

Post by nemothekid »

rsync wrote: post #286

Why doesn't he just fund this experiment himself ? From wikipedia: "Originally a corporate lawyer, Yang began working in various startups and early stage growth companies as a founder or executive from 2000 to 2009." Maybe this a matching donation from Dorsey ?

He probably spent a ton of his own money running for president.

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

#300

Post by nawitus »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #162
Press2forEN wrote: post #110

Years ago, proponents of UBI claimed that it was a replacement for all other forms of social welfare. Now it appears by most proposals to be yet another means-tested add-on. What happened?

People studied the UBI idea and recognized the costs of giving money to everyone are so enormous that it's unworkable. That's there the means testing has come in to try to limit that. Something more like a "guaranteed minimum income" where you can't have less money than what is required to have a good standard of living is a cheaper and more effective idea that accomplishes the same goals of ending poverty.

> People studied the UBI idea and recognized the costs of giving money to everyone are so enormous that it's unworkable.

Not really. There are UBI models that are more or less zero cost - taxes are increased by roughly the UBI amount for employed workers, and for the unemployed the UBI would be similar to the unemployment benefits they would lose.

Post reply on HN