Universal basic income to be tested in Wales • Hacker News Board

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#191

Post by spicybright » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #13

GordonS wrote: post #9

I'm going to assume it won't be "for life", but will instead be for some fixed period, such as 1 or 2 years. Scotland has been proposing doing a similar experiment too. But I'm not sure what these very small scale experiments are meant to tell us, especially since several such experiments have already been done. I can't help but be cynical and think this is governments offering platitudes to those in favour of UBI, r…

This has always been my problem. If we're going to test UBI, then we really need to run a test over a reasonable time-frame (20 years) or so and commit into it. So we move some people off the existing schemes we have, onto UBI and let that study run. I suspect the ideal candidate group would be older, poorer people (say, in there 40s) who we would otherwise expect to coast onto a pension later. It timeframes it nicel…

Not only for a long time, but you need a fairly wide area of "coverage" to get good data.

Imagine if Boston suddenly announced UBI for all residents. People are going to be toppling over each other to get into that city somehow for the free money.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#192

Post by gandalfian » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

pbronez wrote: post #116

gandalfian wrote: post #40

In practice the UK already pays the price for a universal basic income. Most poor people get some sort of tax credit and/or housing benefit. What we don't do is allow people to use it to rise out of poverty. A disabled lady thought saving some of her disability was the responsible thing to do, despite further impoverishing herself, once she built up some savings she was prosecuted for fraudently claiming benefits whi…

Do you think it’s honestly that sophisticated and malicious? Public policy is hard. Adjusting benefits appropriately as people climb out of poverty is a known challenge. It’s called a “welfare trap” and has its own Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap

I really don't think it's hate. I think it's fear and cynicism clouding the bigger picture and keeping us all stuck in a trap of our own making.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#193

Post by tryonenow » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

moshmosh wrote: post #129

jokethrowaway wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not up to you to decide what to do with other people's money. Feel free to donate all your money to the poor who deserve better; if you will use threat of violence to get someone else money (no matter the cause) I'll call you immoral.

The threat of violence enforced the system that let them get the money (with a democratic government's name printed on it, mind you) to begin with. Was violence immoral when it enforced a system that shaped wages and the returns of capital in such-and-such way?

There's a massive difference between using threat of violence to ensure that people are able to secure the legitimately owned fruits of their labor, and forcibly taking their labor outputs and redistributing them among those who are not contributing to the same degree or at all.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#194

Post by emteycz » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

ItsMonkk wrote: post #63

Housing can’t be both affordable and a good investment. The price of a home should therefore equal its replacement cost. If the market value of the home with the land is $1 million, but the cost to build the home is $200k, raise taxes on the land until the new market value is $200k. Tada, Land Value Tax. Why am I mentioning LVT in a Universal Basic Income thread? What should we do with the money we earn through a LVT…

Unless... The value of the land becomes taxes+land+house. Happens in high demand areas normally.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#195

Post by lexicality » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

hogFeast wrote: post #164

rodiger wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't lose UBI by working. UBI should be intended to be the lowest possible amount of money to live. Life won't be fun/good if you're only relying on UBI. In that model I imagine plenty would prefer to keep their job in addition to UBI.

What is the functional difference then? Your comment elides the point that almost everyone who wants UBI views at this mythical source of extra money from nowhere. The UK already has a welfare state, we have Universal Credit which is basically a consolidated welfare payment to people who need money, and the main complaint (justified if we consider housing costs) is that this isn't enough. I am not exactly sure how pa…

> I am not exactly sure how paying everyone money helps people who need it more than a system that just gives money to people who need it

I mean one obvious benefit is the monumental amount of savings in government services caused by getting rid of all of the bureaucracy involved in making sure only people who "need" the payment get it.

You can get rid of all the job centres, all the review boards, all the DWP departments that have to constantly check people's eligibility etc

You also free up time for people that are currently on UC who need to constantly go and confirm that yes, they still can't work. Now they just get the money and can go do whatever without having to justify selling knitting on etsy or whatever

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#196

Post by OJFord » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

gandalfian wrote: post #40

In practice the UK already pays the price for a universal basic income. Most poor people get some sort of tax credit and/or housing benefit. What we don't do is allow people to use it to rise out of poverty. A disabled lady thought saving some of her disability was the responsible thing to do, despite further impoverishing herself, once she built up some savings she was prosecuted for fraudently claiming benefits whi…

> when this is precisely what would lift people out of poverty long term and reduce the costs on society.

How, if you disallow stopping the payment?

It seems like what you want to happen is exactly what did happen: she saved, had money, and then the cost on society was reduced.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#197

Post by ItsMonkk » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

smaryjerry wrote: post #77

ssharp wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI isn't unemployment. You could collect UBI and still work.

You could but no one would because they make more money not working. It equates to basically paying the company to work.

I find it fascinating that this community can both have this stance and find nothing wrong with the FIRE movement.

What is a $1000/month UBI? Using the 4% rule, it's equivalent to having investments worth $300000.

I have a feeling that a lot of people on HN have a portfolio worth $300000. Are you still working?

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#198

Post by hogFeast » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

growse wrote: post #106

intricatedetail wrote: post #80

That's where my taxes will go. And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back.

> That's where my taxes will go. The welfare state already receives the largest fraction of your taxes. Personally, I'm in favour of things that make the welfare state more cost-effective. > And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back. You don't have to, you choose to.

No, the welfare state doesn't receive "the largest fraction" of your taxes. Thinking this is a bit of a meme in the UK. The largest category of spending is actually the state pension (which is partly funded by direct revenue), this isn't welfare. The actual amounts that go towards helping people who actually need help in the UK is relatively small.

Unemployment benefits vanishingly small. Even when unemployment was high, the total spending barely surpassed a few billion (in real terms, they haven't increased since the 70s or something ludicrous). Disability is a large category, although some of this in-work people, but a big issue over the past ten years has been implementation of UC...this cost £12bn (the implementation of UC i.e. the amount handed out to contractors was 25%+ of what was actually given to claimant...Duncan-Smith had a neuralgia about "scroungers"). Tax credits are a large category but these are semi-universal and made to people in work. How they can be distinguished from a subsidy to companies is unclear.

So the actual net effect isn't that clear. The UK has a relatively small welfare state (this is apparent if you actually talk to anyone on benefits...in the pandemic some people realised for the first time that welfare state wasn't actually that generous...and then we got a massive in-work subsidy program, I am guessing that if you had been on UC subject to regular inquiries by the DWP to get a grand total of £80/week or whatever, the state lavishing subsidies on someone making £200/day was...odd).

The NHS has pretty poor outcomes for a developed country. It is provided at low-cost (interestingly, about half the size of the public health system in the US) but the results are very poor (politically, doctor's unions have had very strong lobbying, so when spending increases it has typically gone into the back pocket of doctors with output unchanged). Private healthcare is better.

Btw, if you are seeing a trend here: the UK's problem is that there is a massive political demand for subsidies, regardless of whether you are in need or not, but 40% of adults pay no income tax. There is a massive disconnect.

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#199

Post by Al-Khwarizmi » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

gandalfian wrote: post #40

In practice the UK already pays the price for a universal basic income. Most poor people get some sort of tax credit and/or housing benefit. What we don't do is allow people to use it to rise out of poverty. A disabled lady thought saving some of her disability was the responsible thing to do, despite further impoverishing herself, once she built up some savings she was prosecuted for fraudently claiming benefits whi…

In Spain it's similar, we already have de facto basic income, just much more complicated than it should be. When you lose your job you have unemployment payments, when it expires there is a "long-term unemployment aid" that in theory was a temporary measure for the 2008 crisis, but every government has kept extending and no one has dared to remove, even when the right had an absolute majority. And then there are regional aids for "social reinsertion". So basically everyone is covered by a safety net and can obtain some income except for people who actively refuse to do so.

Still, actual UBI here is an unpopular idea with most of the population, who say that people need to work for a living, that it's a "handout" for lazy people, it will make people stop working, etc. Funny when the two largest problems of our society are probably unemployment (lack of work for people who do want one) and lack of children. And both are problems that ask for less total hours worked, not more.

To me, it's a purely moralistic issue (and based on quite outdated morals). If we are already putting in the money to ensure that people have some basic needs covered, from a rational point of view I don't see the problem with turning it into an automatic right instead of something that people need to apply for and that we pretend is "temporary" (but not even the political right will remove it, no one wants the streets full of people with nothing to lose). And as a side effect, we could get rid of a lot of bureaucratic overhead in the process, plus no longer needing minimum wage and making the job market more dynamic.

I guess logic will triumph in the end, although it's difficult because there is a lot of purely irrational thinking. For example, most of the people who furiously oppose an UBI because in theory everyone should have to make an effort and earn a living for themselves are also the people who furiously oppose taxing large inheritances...

Re: Universal basic income to be tested in Wales

#200

Post by jxidjhdhdhdhfhf » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

ItsMonkk wrote: post #63

Housing can’t be both affordable and a good investment. The price of a home should therefore equal its replacement cost. If the market value of the home with the land is $1 million, but the cost to build the home is $200k, raise taxes on the land until the new market value is $200k. Tada, Land Value Tax. Why am I mentioning LVT in a Universal Basic Income thread? What should we do with the money we earn through a LVT…

I don't quite understand. The land reduces in price because of LVT, requiring a smaller mortgage. But wouldn't we expect the smaller mortgage + LVT to be equal to the old higher priced mortgage? After all the intrinsic value associated with owning the property hasn't changed.

My point is how is a buyer better off under this scenario if they would have to pay the same amount per year in order to have a home? In fact they'd be worse off because a mortgage can be paid off but a LVT cannot. And wouldn't the LVT collapsing housing prices massively reduce the net worth of homeowners? Usually a home is the largest store of net worth that people have.