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

471–480 of 746 posts

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

#471

Post by [deleted] »

grayfaced wrote: post #293
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 tu…

[deleted]

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

#472

Post by mason55 »

zhoujianfu wrote: post #402
kaffeemitsahne wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every experiment in UBI says otherwise. Has even one of these been a permanent (for the recipients) experiment?

I don’t know why they don’t do this at $1K/mo for life for 30 people (and then study them qualitatively) instead of $250 one-time for 20,000. What is a one-time payment of $250 going to tell us about a UBI?

The biggest problem with UBI is political. Even if you manage to implement it you have no guarantee that the next administration will continue it. If you can't guarantee that your $1k/mo will really be for life then you can't take the risks on things like starting a small business because you might have to go back to work one day and if you have a large employment gap that's going to be tough.

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

#473

Post by elicash »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #470
elicash wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proponents of UBI were ALWAYS a coalition of different people who came from different ideological backgrounds and believed different things.

Well that's certainly true of every cause right?

The successful ones create coalitions, certainly! It's also a good argument against painting people who seemingly agree with too broad a brush.

But in this case, I remember a coworker of mine who a while back created an advocacy org for UBI. He's a socialist. I specifically remember him reaching out to work with libertarians and getting them in leadership roles. (Not sure if this org still exists.)

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

#474

Post by timwaagh »

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?

maybe they got a reality check insofar this is possible for BI proponents. someone with (say) a broken arm needs more than a healthy person who is just unemployed.

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

#475

Post by somethoughts »

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?

Just happened to be reading about how the current stimulus checks are being used this morning. Perhaps its a bit of click bait, but interesting to ponder nonetheless. It does seem like using UBI to play in the stock market would not be the intent of UBI and be hard to prevent.

"Many Americans used part of their coronavirus stimulus check to trade stocks"

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/21/many-americans-used-part-of-...

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

#477

Post by d0100 »

UBI should cover government-regulated and government-provided essentials to living.

Ex.:

* Government housing: $500

* Government basic food package - daily (1500kcal): $300

* x kJ electricity, x m3 water, x m3 gas, x bps internet connection: $500

* Clothing, hygiene, cleaning supplies: $50

* Universal healthcare: free (and free condoms)

* Free education (from abc to PHD)

This is not a comprehensive list, or even the right values, however you can guarantee a base-level of what is "living with dignity" and apt to participate in the democracy.

I doubt you'd have too many people deciding to live without a job. It's not the best life, but you can survive with some human dignity. Many around the world live with much less.

UBI isn't the American Dream, it's the safety net.

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

#478

Post by hrktb »

drak0n1c wrote: post #310
JoshTriplett wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) The "U" in "UBI" means that working another job does not stop you from receiving UBI, which means it may still make sense to do so if you want more income. UBI is supposed to be enough to live on, not enough to have everything you might want; there are at least preliminary results that show UBI doesn't stop people from working. 2) UBI will tend to mean less people willing to work low-paying unpleasant jobs, which…

It's a gamble - either 2 will lead to 3, or 2 will lead to input and output prices of goods being raised. Probably some of both. Hopefully more of 3 than the alternative, because the alternative scenario of prices rising has negative consequences in the form of economic deadweight loss even if UBI pays for the price increases.

2) and 3) are very simplistic predictions and we don’t have any idea if it has a higher chance to go that way.

For instance an effect of UBI would be disappearance of bullshit jobs. A lot of job won’t see wages increase and will just be automated/optimized away instead.

OTOH it could mean getting rid of minimum salary, which would lower the cost for high demand/vocational low paying work for instance (dog walking, cafe staff, event staff etc.)

All in all I’m not sure it’s as simple as saying “people have money without working = prices go up”

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

#479

Post by osdiab »

EpicEng wrote: post #262
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.

>Every experiment in UBI says otherwise. There has never been a test on a scale which would lead people to do it though. If you know you're part of a short lived experiment you're not quitting your job.

The GiveDirectly trial is a 12-year long one - not whole life, but also not insignificant.

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

#480

Post by wturner »

buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #453
zhoujianfu wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I think UBI should/would/could actually be very popular from a small government perspective as well. What if a republican ran on the platform that “if elected, I will make it a law that 10% of all federal revenue must be directly distributed equally to all citizens. Then is grows 5% a year until it hits 80% in 2036!”?

Because then the government inevitably either 1) runs out of money, 2) cuts spending drastically, or 3) drastically increases taxes on the wealthy to pay for everything. We all know that 1 and 2 (probably) aren't going to happen. And I don't know many republicans that want the wealthy's money redistributed equally amongst all Americans.

1 definitely won't happen. Money is nothing more than a number on a computer screen. When the fed spends, they just type a new number on the screen - literally. Modern Monetary theory really opened my eyes around the phony assumptions regarding U.S. "debt".

Edit - I know money is more that a number on a computer screen, it's also a general collection of cultural assumptions, it's a partial reflection of the energy system etc. I'm replying in the context of "running out of money"

Post reply on HN