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

#541

Post by donw » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:43 AM UTC

jms wrote: post #530

sneak wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea here is that UBI replaces all of the other government welfare programs, no? What happens when someone spends all their UBI on whiskey or oxy and consumes it all and is then hungry? Should we keep food stamps around? Why can't we do that part (universal food stamps) by itself? I don't think the all-or-nothing approach of UBI makes a ton of sense. We can do things today like more free or subsidized foo…

So what if someone spends it all on whiskey or oxy? They're maximising their own preferences. If they were addicted to alcohol, sudden withdrawal can kill. One of the big reasons for UBI is the belief that an individual can better assess their own needs and wants, and procure them more cheaply than the government. This is partly a moral/philosphical stand - the tension is between giving individual freedom in the form…

I agree very strongly with you, but I don't think that's where the parent poster was going.

Imagine we have a UBI, and we do all kinds of other smart things -- end the War on Drugs, establish Bismarck-style national healthcare[1], all that.

Let's do a thought experiment.

What happens when Alice blows all of her UBI on Lady Lee Vodka and Oxy. Nothing left for rent, food, the rest. Nobody else in the picture to help: no relatives, nada.

If we look at UBI as the only social assistance program, Alice dies on the street.

That's the reality, and we need to accept that.

Alternatively, we would need some sort of "backup" reserved for people that are not capable of caring for themselves.

Maybe something like restarting the mental hospitals that Reagan closed in the 80's after Geraldo -- and the rest of Our Friends In The News -- ran wild with the scandal of how awful those government-run mental hospitals were, with the end result being that a bunch of mentally ill folks got chucked out on the street.

Now, I don't know what the answer is. I really don't.

My concern is that I see a lot of people talking up only the benefits, and not in any way addressing the failure cases.

[1] Yields better results than single-payer, and is better at controlling costs.

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

#542

Post by jakeogh » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:44 AM UTC

rorykoehler wrote: post #502

twblalock wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't going to replace existing welfare systems, why not improve them, instead of adding yet another system to the mix?

Think of UBI as another lever in a countries' monetary and fiscal policies. In fact is it completely insane that this is not already in the mix from a purely pragmatic perspective.

It's an authortarian dream. Got a fine? Just deduct it. Putting people on the take gives government significantly more leverage over them. Just wait till China pairs it with their social credit score.

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

#543

Post by agd621 » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:45 AM UTC

misun78 wrote: post #533

nexuist wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What happens when someone spends all their UBI on whiskey or oxy and consumes it all and is then hungry? What's the difference between that and the current reality? Food stamps can be sold and bought on the black market in exchange for drugs and alcohol; people who want whiskey will be able to get it. Whatever money is spent on enforcing the "sanctity" of food stamps could just go to more people directly. And this…

If that’s the core argument for UBI i.e. it’s far more efficient, why do such proposed initiatives come with significant tax increases on the population? Your analysis should theoretically support a net decrease in spending on welfare (hence lower taxes) or best case, no additional increase. You would have a lot broader support if UBI wasn’t tied to egregious tax proposals like a wealth tax.

I’d guess that’s where the 5 million from Dorsey comes in. Figure the dollar amounts for replacing certain services. (I didn’t read the article, appologies If I’m way off.)

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

#544

Post by theboat » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:46 AM UTC

rorykoehler wrote: post #502

twblalock wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't going to replace existing welfare systems, why not improve them, instead of adding yet another system to the mix?

Think of UBI as another lever in a countries' monetary and fiscal policies. In fact is it completely insane that this is not already in the mix from a purely pragmatic perspective.

it...is? what else would you call sending stimulus checks to nearly every American? however shortlived, we effectively had UBI, helicopter money, or a negative income tax, whatever you wish to call it

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

#545

Post by eli_gottlieb » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:47 AM UTC

zelly wrote: post #387

Reedx wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't replace people making things, though. You'd still want to work and create value to improve your situation. It'd just function as a floor and provide some stability. Bearing in mind the increasing rate of job destruction and creation. We're no longer in a world where you can rely on being able to have the same profession your whole life. Having that floor would be useful to smooth those transitions out, and…

There are countries with a permanent dole. See the UK and other Northern Euro nations. You just have to fake an autism diagnosis to get $3k euros a month in cash alone (not counting all the other programs). Why isn't that the entrepreneurship capital of the world? Why is Europe still so poor? Why is America--the only place where there isn't a safety net and you can literally die on the street if you make too many bad…

>Why is Europe still so poor?

Sorry, what? The EU is the most highly developed unified economy on Earth.

>Necessity is the mother of all invention. People take risks out of desperation, not for "fun".

"People who can provide for themselves in dignity, won't let me whip them." You're expressing a strangely fetishized, sadomasochistic view of business. Perhaps you should take a cold shower?

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

#546

Post by donw » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:49 AM UTC

gwillz wrote: post #521

sneak wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea here is that UBI replaces all of the other government welfare programs, no? What happens when someone spends all their UBI on whiskey or oxy and consumes it all and is then hungry? Should we keep food stamps around? Why can't we do that part (universal food stamps) by itself? I don't think the all-or-nothing approach of UBI makes a ton of sense. We can do things today like more free or subsidized foo…

> "What happens when someone spends all their UBI" I think that's the most important question. I believe the story is that one will abuse whatever welfare they get. Whether it's stamps, credits, services or money. Here in Australia they've been trialing a cashless debit card to control what people spend their welfare money on. Somehow, it's still costing _more_ than just giving people money and the recipients aren't…

> Poverty is literally only solved with money.

That's a big statement, with a lot of evidence against it. I recall an experiment where a homeless man was given $100,000, and was back on the streets in no time.

The idea that you "solve problems with money" seems to be an American disease. That we just haven't pumped enough money into the machine to make it work.

Homelessness and poverty are big, complex problems. Money is likely part of the solution, but so is education, and we aren't going to fix that with Yet More Money -- seriously, the US spends an insane amount on education to receive incredibly poor results.

> Surprisingly, the cheapest and easiest way to solve someone's poverty is to just give them money. If they abuse it? Fine. They were going to do that anyway.

I agree with you there. All the efforts to curb "abuse" have been an absolute waste of time.

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

#547

Post by WalterBright » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:51 AM UTC

uoaei wrote: post #539

WalterBright wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's built on people spending money Money is a recent invention, and economies have flourished without it. Money facilitates trade, increases liquidity, and reduces friction in transactions. > This fetishism with "work" as a proxy for the value of the human life which performs the work It is not a proxy for the value of a human life. It is a representation of the value of the labor of that human. Americans are very…

> It is a representation of the value of the labor of that human. By withholding economic power until someone provides "labor" as defined by the state, and leaving them embedded in an economy which requires money to survive, you are directly tying the value of the human life to the value of their labor. > giving to charities Interesting, probably has a lot to do with the low taxes and high amount of disposable income…

> probably has a lot to do with the low taxes and high amount of disposable income.

A young lady I used to know was the kindest person I ever met. She didn't have much, but would donate a few dollars to every charity that called. They had her number, and called her all the time.

She was the real deal, not one of those people who are only generous with someone else's money.

> you are directly tying the value of the human life to the value of their labor.

Oh baloney. Plenty of people will voluntarily give food to a hungry person.

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

#548

Post by misun78 » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:52 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #414

zelly wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are countries with a permanent dole. See the UK and other Northern Euro nations. You just have to fake an autism diagnosis to get $3k euros a month in cash alone (not counting all the other programs). Why isn't that the entrepreneurship capital of the world? Why is Europe still so poor? Why is America--the only place where there isn't a safety net and you can literally die on the street if you make too many bad…

> See the UK and other Northern Euro nations. You just have to fake an autism diagnosis to get $3k euros a month in cash alone (not counting all the other programs). In the UK we have a variety of disability benefits. Someone starting a claim today is probably going to apply for New Style ESA. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-style-employment-and-support... > If you have been found to have limited capability for work,…

Jeez, what a bureaucratic nightmare this sounds

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

#549

Post by Reedx » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:53 AM UTC

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #527

Reedx wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I think you can overdo it. Yang's proposal was $1k/mo, which seems more like the sweet spot.

It'll never stay $1k a month because voters will vote in politicians that will increase it, year after year. We've already seen this happen with the US Social Security program. Why repeat something that is known not to work?

Yeah, was hoping to hear how he planned to address that (unless I missed it?).

It'd need to be indexed to something or have other hard controls to prevent that spiraling: "Vote for me, I'll increase it to $2k" "No, vote for me, I'll increase it to $3k!"

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

#550

Post by devonkim » Fri, May 22, 2020, 1:54 AM UTC

demadog wrote: post #511

d0100 wrote: post #477

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…

I'd be curious to see it play out in a smaller country for a few years. The U.S. is a big place to gamble on it. No one is saying flip the switch for 328.2 million, I know that, but at the same time it would be best to do an MVP on a smaller scale with, say, a population of 5 million and then learn and iterate from there. Even when testing with 5 million though, you often have countries of that size having more of a…

One of the problems with UBI on a small scale in the US is that it’s difficult to study the macroeconomic effects that people are so worried about. The studies on direct cash assistance in terms of social science are rather strong evidence in favor of what left leaning proponents claim. The reservations typically come from the American right which is more of a Social Darwinist party these days than a conservative one, which is closer to the Reagan Republican era GOP.

We probably need tens of billions of dollars to pilot UBI properly in the US across borders and to help setup the infrastructure to distribute the funds. But compared to another missile program, the social good of such a program is undeniable. Which is probably why it’ll be rejected in today’s hell world US politics.