Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#181

Post by esrauch » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:42 PM UTC

gremlinsinc wrote: post #93

Fargren wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real fairness under that definition can't exist as long as there are inheritances. People who are born in wealthier families are not playing under the same rules (just imagine if a person playing Monopoly started with ten times the initial amount of money). I prefer a definition of fairness that is actually achievable[1]: everyone has at least the bare minimum, regardless of fitness and deserving. You can quibble abo…

I can't see our modern society lasting without this. Not much longer. Not after covid, and whatever 2020's throw at us, and global warming. Food riots, and real civil discord are only months away, if not weeks.

It seems like plausible fears could be raised for food riots in our lifetimes, but not really in weeks. There's not even widespread shortages and depression era soup kitchen lines today, and those would surely preceed food riots.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#182

Post by sdenton4 » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #50

missedthecue wrote: post #2

These studies don't really prove anything. Common arguments in favor of these studies - "They prove people don't quit work on UBI!" - No, they prove that people who are in a program that is very clearly temporary will not end their careers for a short pilot program. This means nothing. "They prove people won't spend it on drugs, booze, and lotto tickets!" - No. If you make $1k from a job and $1k from a pilot program…

Any UBI could be entirely reversed by an equal and opposite tax. Of course this would be pointless, but it shows that there are many possibilities, depending on what sort of taxes you combine it with, and some of them are certainly feasible because the net effect is small. UBI is largely about symbolic equality, the kindergarten-level fairness of everyone getting the same amount. That’s important because symbols of e…

It's not about fairness at all: it's about poverty traps, and getting people out of them. With the learned understanding that if you give things to the poor, you also have to give them to the rich, because the rich are unable to look at any pie they can't have a slice of without wanting to destroy it.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#183

Post by dane-pgp » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

karpierz wrote: post #166

djrogers wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What UBI skeptical people want to know is where is the proof that we can afford to tax ourselves to pay ourselves What UBI skeptics seem to be avoiding, ignoring, or unaware of, is just how prevalent this situation already is. Most of the UBI fans I know want to replace the overlapping, redundant, and inefficient welfare systems currently in place with a simple, efficient, and universal benefit.

How inefficient are welfare systems, and how is that measured?

One measure is the amount of unclaimed benefits, which can amount to billions of pounds per year in the UK:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17139088

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#184

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:46 PM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #2

These studies don't really prove anything. Common arguments in favor of these studies - "They prove people don't quit work on UBI!" - No, they prove that people who are in a program that is very clearly temporary will not end their careers for a short pilot program. This means nothing. "They prove people won't spend it on drugs, booze, and lotto tickets!" - No. If you make $1k from a job and $1k from a pilot program…

I mean, these are pilots.

They absolutely could result in the participants quitting their jobs, or just spending the money on booze and drugs and becoming unproductive and unhappy.

This appears to not be the case so far, so the results may justify a larger-scale, longer-term program, which may eventually provide enough evidence for a smaller nation or state to take the leap of rolling out a full-fledged UBI.

You're interested in the scalability of the thing, but we're still in the proof-of-concept phase, merely trying to deduce whether or not the idea actually has any potential, or if it's completely dead-on-arrival.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#185

Post by dane-pgp » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

verdverm wrote: post #57

yboris wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm puzzled why we can't phase it in over time. Start with $100/month. The US can handle that. And then ramp it up as we see fit.

Let's vote for the candidate which will give us the most money... seems like a slippery slope

Let's vote for (and give "campaign contributions" to) the candidate who will lower our taxes the most... seems like a slippery slope.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#186

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:50 PM UTC

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #146

baconandeggs wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is why it will fail. Fairness is not about everyone getting the same amount just for existing, for that in itself is not fair. Real fairness is everyone playing against the same rules and being treated the same under the law. Sadly governments and politicians are too corrupt to implement real fairness and have decided instead for the populist way out while keeping their insane advantage intact.

Just in case someone later asks and you're in doubt: this is where the thread derailed into that most tired exchange of entirely predictable arguments first seen immediately after the publication of Atlas Shrugged , and handed down from one mediocre 16 year-old to the next generation in surprisingly faithful reproduction ever since.

[deleted]

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#187

Post by manigandham » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

biomodel wrote: post #143

vorpalhex wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference between your local grocery store clerk, and a Hollywood actor? They both likely have cars, homes and an iphone. Sure, your Hollywood actor is probably driving an exotic sports car and their iphone is diamond studded, but fundamentally, what does it matter? > housing, food, education and health. Any society where anyone can't get those things by asking for them is not fair I agree in the general…

And this is why UBI was supported by right leaning economists like Milton Friedman. If we believe that people in wealthy societies should have a minimal standard of living including basic food, housing and health care then we can provide it through the market in the form of a basic income It will avoid the perverse incentives that lead people to get costly health care in the ER (which is then covered by other patient…

Friedman proposed a negative income tax which is different, and arguably better, than a standard flat payment.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#188

Post by germandude123 » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

wil421 wrote: post #97

elchin wrote: post #61

https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/service/gehaltsrechner-geh... An article in German, but 1943 Euros a month in Germany is the median income. And it takes only around 6100/month to be 1%.

Is that gross or net income?

net. also, calling it "only 6100" is completely crazy by german standards.

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#189

Post by ghostwriter » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

searchableguy wrote: post #102

baconandeggs wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is why it will fail. Fairness is not about everyone getting the same amount just for existing, for that in itself is not fair. Real fairness is everyone playing against the same rules and being treated the same under the law. Sadly governments and politicians are too corrupt to implement real fairness and have decided instead for the populist way out while keeping their insane advantage intact.

Fairness is leveling the playground. It's not equality. By birth, you are unequal. Would you say we should have the same measures for people with physical disabilities from birth and healthy athletes? No. That's why we have separate categories or measures. That is fair. And that is not treating everyone equally.

The notion of everyone being equal has to do with the equality under the rule of law, and nothing else. There can be no other categories of measures in that regard precisely because you cannot perform any meaningful measures across several different dimensions of differences. For instance, would you be able to make a meaningful measure of who is underprivileged the most - an orphan billionare who is not likeable by anyone in his close circle of "friends" or a poor family of 5 who regularly get invited to family dinners in their community? What are the standards?

Re: Germany begins 3-year universal-basic-income trial

#190

Post by anemoiac » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #2

These studies don't really prove anything. Common arguments in favor of these studies - "They prove people don't quit work on UBI!" - No, they prove that people who are in a program that is very clearly temporary will not end their careers for a short pilot program. This means nothing. "They prove people won't spend it on drugs, booze, and lotto tickets!" - No. If you make $1k from a job and $1k from a pilot program…

> ...where is the proof that it won't hurt long term productivity, and where is the proof that it doesn't cause inflation[?]

Assuming we could obtain reliable proof that UBI reduces productivity and/or increases inflation, that doesn't necessarily imply that it's an undesirable policy. The economy exists to serve humanity, not to maximize productivity or minimize inflation. It's certainly possible that a policy could provide an overall benefit to humanity while simultaneously reducing economic productivity and/or increasing inflation by some amount.