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

681–690 of 746 posts

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

#681

Post by techbio »

mdoms wrote: post #629
techbio wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting questions, but I think GP used the shortened form of "negative income tax bracket".

No. A negative income tax is a well established principle. It can be implemented as a bracket, but it can also be implemented as a tax credit or in a fully progressive tax system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax

Yes, I understand that. It is indeed far more common to hear the term negative income tax than with "bracket" at the end. I was giving an extra detail to distinguish the term from the truncated jargon the above poster appeared to misunderstand. (It is NOT a "negative income tax rate" but effectively a bracket that owes a negative tax liability thanks to the tax credit/UBI/call it mana if you want to.

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

#682

Post by dlkf »

BasedCode wrote: post #669
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Under the gov't version, if you were healthy, you're "free". You only cost when you actually need the medical treatment. Government insurance is still insurance. It isn't that each individual costs the government $10,000, it's that most cost them nothing and one in ten gets cancer and costs $100,000. Insurance is the same. The large majority of the money isn't going to the insurance company, it's going to healthcar…

I get the impression you're idealising the free market. The numbers[1][2] speak for themselves in proving that universal healthcare is the most affordable way to provide good healthcare. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_h... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_ex... In the UK the NHS (2016) per capita cost was $4,192 (PPP) and in the US the per capita cost was $…

Same story for education [1]. I won't be moved by cries of "we're exceptional" until the US actually tries adopting the policies that have worked so well for Europe and Canada.

[1] https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Int...

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

#683

Post by fastball »

scared2 wrote: post #677

I really don't understand the hype behind ubi as a new concept. If one wants to explore it's effect or anything like so - it is just enough to see Arab countries and other places who have been doing it already. Other than that it should be obvious to anyone that this is not scalable and it doesn't work. in the end basic income will translate into an artificially induced inflation.

> in the end basic income will translate into an artificially induced inflation.

Citation needed. Presumably this has been happening in the Arab countries that you claim have already instituted UBI, so I'm assuming you have sources...

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

#684

Post by fastball »

Tade0 wrote: post #462
gowld wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And housing.

This is the elephant in the room here. It's a basic good, but its price is still very much driven by supply and demand.

America just needs zoning policy that isn't totally broken (i.e. geared towards the rich). Japan has been doing a pretty good job.

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

#685

Post by fastball »

zozbot234 wrote: post #222
Tiktaalik wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

UBI is indirectly means-tested; if you make too much money, you end up giving back as much or more in taxes and/or partial UBI clawbacks than what you would get via UBI. This actually ends up working better and being cheaper than most alternatives (including the "guaranteed minimum"), because it's comparatively easy to structure a comprehensive tax system so that it minimizes distortions on people's behavior, and har…

The universality doesn't just reduce admin costs, it also eliminates the "maybe I shouldn't get this really crap job because then I won't get to collect my unemployment" and similar mindsets that can be a result of means-testing.

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

#686

Post by fastball »

timwaagh wrote: post #474
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.

Why does someone with a broken arm need more than someone without one if both are unemployed?

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

#687

Post by Frondo »

WalterBright wrote: post #660
Frondo wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Charity has never adequately addressed social problems in America. signed, a surfer

I'm not aware of any social problem that has been adequately resolved by any organization, government or private. There's always someone who thinks it's not good enough. Certainly UBI isn't going to do it, either.

There are 12 US cities that have achieved "functional zero" homelessness -- no chronic homelessness and no homeless vets.

The country of Finland has done the same, with a plan to reach absolute zero (nobody staying temporarily with friends or relatives) by 2022. Right now, over there, with 5.5 million people, 500 people don't have permanent housing of their own.

Does that count?

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

#688

Post by dlkf »

As soon as I read the headline my first thought was "what can $5M tell you about the efficacy of UBI?" and the article quickly confirmed my suspicions: "nothing." From the article:

> 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.

What is this supposed to prove? People who are in a terrible economic position will benefit from getting $250? We don't need to run an "experiment" to know that the answer is "yes." And this isn't even "experiment," as there is neither a response variable being measured, nor a control group.

What's happening right now is terrible, and it is good that Dorsey and Yang for making this donation. It is bad, however, that they are trying to spin this as a scientific investigation into the efficacy of UBI. I think that we need to start experimenting with UBI sooner rather than later. But when I see stuff like this, I worry that a lot of UBI advocates are less interested in raising the poverty line than they are in creating excuses to gut the welfare state.

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

#689

Post by devonkim »

izzydata wrote: post #589
devonkim wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The psychology of a large one time payment versus a passive, smaller one is absolutely immense and should not be equated. Native tribes have oftentimes given their youth large payments that get spent on expensive consumer goods that wind up back in pawn shops, but UBI experiments in Kenya and in low income areas around the world have shown dramatically different results with the hallmarks of upward mobility presentin…

There must be some data on lottery winners taking one lump sum and small payouts over time.

I read somewhere around 80%+ take the lump sum about 12 years ago. Given the risks of inflation over 25+ years it isn’t a bad idea. Most lottery winners get accosted by family members or spend like crazy with their money and wind up broke in the end. However, a great deal of them do at least take care of their health at least (getting teeth fixed was common). A mental trap of scarcity makes it difficult for the perpetually poor to think of money as nothing more than something to be spent rather than invested, but even here the HGTV dream home winner around 2007 sold the house to create... a construction company, which went bankrupt quickly.

Financial literacy can be taught over time though similar to helping people diet and control portions.

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

#690

Post by burrows »

kerkeslager wrote: post #679
jpindar wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>since companies will have to pay significantly more than UBI. They would only have to do that if people had to choose between taking the job and getting UBI.

Ehh, not exactly. My personal situation is an example: if UBI were implemented I would quit working immediately to pursue a graduate degree. Granted, that graduate degree would lead me back into the workforce eventually, but at least in the short run, it would take significant incentives to keep me in the workforce if pursuing education instead were an option. I also know someone who works for $20/hour, and pays $12/…

> If they were receiving a livable UBI, I have no doubt that they would choose to raise their children full time rather than work for an absurdly low wage.

Having a child isn’t some externality requiring government intervention. Your friend is an adult who choose to allocate their time into child-rearing rather than wage-increasing activities.

Post reply on HN