Trading Time for Money • Hacker News Board

Re: Trading Time for Money

#101

Post by notahacker » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:06 PM UTC

robocat wrote: post #88

keiferski wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the point is that this will change the whole system. How many talented artists decided to become stockbrokers instead, simply because they wanted financial stability? Or how many parents encourage their children to follow something "practical" and not what they are truly passionate about? Or academics that love their subject, but don't want to bother with the hassle of adjunct positions and constant reloca…

If you believe in UBI, and you have an average US income, you can already do your own UBI scheme by donating some portion of your income to a group of people in a poor country. Have you done that? If not, why not?

To provide UBI rather than targeted charitable aid to people assessed as being needy, they should probably donate that portion of their income to a randomly selected US citizen instead.

(Though I agree that the targeted poverty relief payment to those with the greatest need for extra dollars would be a better use of the funds)

Re: Trading Time for Money

#102

Post by kebman » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:06 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #92

balfirevic wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably true, except for one important category of goods that has a tendency to suck as much income from people as they can bear - housing. It is true that with UBI people have the option to move somewhere where housing is inexpensive, but I don't think it's desirable to have people already dependent on UBI move to places with lower economic opportunity - cementing their dependence on it. That being said, exp…

> That's probably true, except for one important category of goods that have a tendency to suck as much income from people as they can bear - housing. Exactly. One important piece of evidence is how housing became more expensive when families got double incomes.

If you own a rental in an inexpensive part of town, or perhaps outside town, and you know a lot of people will be looking for more peripheral and inexpensive places, what would you do with that rental? I think most owners would simply increase rent as demand also increased. It might be slightly beneficial for the price of central apartments, but then most people like the convenience of being close to shops and public communications.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#103

Post by paulryanrogers » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:07 PM UTC

nicbou wrote: post #5

dilippkumar wrote: post #3

So roughly, the author is saying something like: if ( outsourcing_cost * alpha > opportunity_cost ) { outsource(); } and discusses how that alpha should be calculated. The author also mentions some side benefits of doing some tasks and getting better at them. Does HN have any thoughts about living a smaller life by doing fewer things and having more time to just live and enjoy life? If spending time figuring out how…

> wouldn’t such knowledge spread quickly and become common knowledge How to lose weight is open knowledge, but that doesn't make it easier, doubly so if you are also fighting other battles. Sometimes there is a solution, but it's just not attainable for everyone. > are there any real life hacks that are not obvious that result in significant quality of life improvements? I didn't want to make this post about my own l…

How do you cover medical when freelancing? Do you have a family to support?

Re: Trading Time for Money

#104

Post by paulryanrogers » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #29

dilippkumar wrote: post #3

So roughly, the author is saying something like: if ( outsourcing_cost * alpha > opportunity_cost ) { outsource(); } and discusses how that alpha should be calculated. The author also mentions some side benefits of doing some tasks and getting better at them. Does HN have any thoughts about living a smaller life by doing fewer things and having more time to just live and enjoy life? If spending time figuring out how…

One could save a decent amount of money for self and family by being handy with basic tools, plumbing, that sort of thing - but most in UK cities don't.

IME in the US anything beyond trivial handiwork risks causing damage that costs more than paying a professional from the start.

Sadly my experience with professionals is the quality of their work is basically random. Sometimes I pay a lot and the quality is terrible. Sometimes I pay very little and it turns out great. And at the end of the day I don't have the time or strength to do everything I could possibly learn and do myself. So my experiments will continue until the neglect from the previous owners is fully repaired.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#105

Post by fnord77 » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:14 PM UTC

robocat wrote: post #59

keiferski wrote: post #18

Analyses like this just make me think Basic Income will radically shake up civilization more than most people realize. In particular, it will help divorce this ubiquitous cultural association between time and money. This reason alone may explain some of the hostility toward implementing even a rudimentary form of UBI. Some of the most rewarding human experiences have zero financial value and subsequently are dismisse…

I know a sample of people on “basic income”: they are on unemployment benefits (or similar.) I am unsure I see any correlation with higher output of culture, art, religion etcetera from those on benefits, even though they may have under-the-table income for necessary tools and consumables. They often do spend more time on family and friends though.

not a great comparison. people on unemployment benefits are under existential stress to find a job. When all you're doing is fretting about when benefits are going to end or spending all your time learning some new trick to become employable, don't expect quality leisure output.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#106

Post by ilkan » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:15 PM UTC

WA wrote: post #97

keiferski wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the point is that this will change the whole system. How many talented artists decided to become stockbrokers instead, simply because they wanted financial stability? Or how many parents encourage their children to follow something "practical" and not what they are truly passionate about? Or academics that love their subject, but don't want to bother with the hassle of adjunct positions and constant reloca…

Please define "talented artist". Artist != someone who sells artworks. Selling art is something else than making art. You could argue that it is almost completely detached from making art. If UBI makes 10% of the population "talented artists", what does that even mean? Who should consume all this art? Doesn't it make "art" much more common and thus, less valuable to society?

Supply and demand is not a law there is also sensitization and the creation of culture. A city with nice restaurants creates higher value on interesting food. The same applies to music-centred cities and art.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#107

Post by dhbradshaw » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:15 PM UTC

balfirevic wrote: post #90

taneq wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you give everyone a fixed amount of money, won't the cost of things just rise accordingly? I hear this argument a lot but I don't think it necessarily follows: - The supply of low end goods (the sort which you can afford with your UBI) is highly automated and will increase rapidly for any small price increase, making their pricing fairly inelastic. - The demand for these goods won't rise greatly (except for low…

That's probably true, except for one important category of goods that has a tendency to suck as much income from people as they can bear - housing. It is true that with UBI people have the option to move somewhere where housing is inexpensive, but I don't think it's desirable to have people already dependent on UBI move to places with lower economic opportunity - cementing their dependence on it. That being said, exp…

UBI will partially decouple housing demand from work locations. This could raise prices in rural areas and lower them in cities.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#108

Post by keiferski » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:21 PM UTC

SubuSS wrote: post #85

keiferski wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the point is that this will change the whole system. How many talented artists decided to become stockbrokers instead, simply because they wanted financial stability? Or how many parents encourage their children to follow something "practical" and not what they are truly passionate about? Or academics that love their subject, but don't want to bother with the hassle of adjunct positions and constant reloca…

If we are going by numbers, how many talented artists are indeed there? Of this how many are talented enough to be both artists and stock brokers AND are overwhelmed by stock broking so much that they give up on their Picasso like talents? 0.0001% of the general pop? May be if we count every one with massive world class but oppressed talents, will they account for 0.1% of the world pop? As much as it would liberate t…

Choosing to pursue a practical career instead of one’s passions seems like a universal thing to me. That doesn’t seem particularly controversial of a thing to say, but apparently for many, “producing invaluable goods” is more important than their fellow humans achieving self-actualization. Not to mention that said goods are by definition not invaluable if the jobs to produce them don’t exist anymore.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#109

Post by paulryanrogers » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:21 PM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #62

dilippkumar wrote: post #3

So roughly, the author is saying something like: if ( outsourcing_cost * alpha > opportunity_cost ) { outsource(); } and discusses how that alpha should be calculated. The author also mentions some side benefits of doing some tasks and getting better at them. Does HN have any thoughts about living a smaller life by doing fewer things and having more time to just live and enjoy life? If spending time figuring out how…

>"Does HN have any thoughts about living a smaller life by doing fewer things and having more time to just live and enjoy life?" I heartily recommend it. Get off the "keeping up with the Joneses" carousel, reduce your living expenses and enjoy both having your money stretch much further as well as building up savings. I invest a sustainable amount of my monthly income into climate-friendly mutual funds, as I expect c…

Repair and reuse is great, though can be time consuming. It's harder now that I have kids. My extended family here in the US expect to buy new things for them on the regular. No amount of explaining has changed that. And I'd rather not cut them off over their bad consumption habits.

The culture in the US seems to be that 'new' is always best. Pollution and slave labor are just boring details, meant only for Dateline specials.

Re: Trading Time for Money

#110

Post by keiferski » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 2:23 PM UTC

WA wrote: post #97

keiferski wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the point is that this will change the whole system. How many talented artists decided to become stockbrokers instead, simply because they wanted financial stability? Or how many parents encourage their children to follow something "practical" and not what they are truly passionate about? Or academics that love their subject, but don't want to bother with the hassle of adjunct positions and constant reloca…

Please define "talented artist". Artist != someone who sells artworks. Selling art is something else than making art. You could argue that it is almost completely detached from making art. If UBI makes 10% of the population "talented artists", what does that even mean? Who should consume all this art? Doesn't it make "art" much more common and thus, less valuable to society?

You’re applying a market analysis to a place where it doesn’t belong. Kind of ironic, considering my original comment.

Popularity or consumption is irrelevant. If someone is satisfied by writing books that no one reads, why is that a problem? Surely we all have hobbies that we enjoy for themselves, not for their social consequences.