Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

universiteitleiden.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 786 posts

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#301

Post by tippytippytango »

You are earning $4000/month after taxes and begin to receive $1000/month. What do you do?

Some fraction of people will reduce their workload so their earnings are $3000/month, bringing their total income back to $4000.

Some fraction of people will not reduce their workload at all and inflate their lifestyle to depend on $5000/month.

The overwhelming majority of people will choose the latter; we already know this, it's one of the chief complaints about a materialist, consumerist oriented society. When people get a raise, they overwhelmingly spend it. It's why most people can't save a $1000 emergency fund.

If you are earning $2000 per month and suddenly your income increases by 50% you feel like a baller, you are going to start eating better, ordering take out a little bit, replace that cracked phone, add a little more data to your cell phone plan, turn that thermostat up a little, whatever.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#302

Post by andi999 »

meatsauce wrote: post #154
_-david-_ wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And the pay would obviously go up. Maybe. Many jobs can be automated, but it was cheaper to just hire minimum wage people to do a job. If the pay required to find people got to be too high, automation would happen more rapidly.

I wonder where people get this idea that you should be paid like a rockstar without knowing how to play the guitar.

That would bei URI, universal rockstar income.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#303

Post by wpietri »

_-david-_ wrote: post #144
staticassertion wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If my job requires menial labor or involves getting berated by customers (many retail jobs), personally I would absolutely not work. Maybe that's a good thing. It's insane how people in service industries are treated - like they're less than human. Shifting some power to them and giving the job a little more of an air of dignity or status would probably help a lot. And the pay would obviously go up. People would be…

>And the pay would obviously go up. Maybe. Many jobs can be automated, but it was cheaper to just hire minimum wage people to do a job. If the pay required to find people got to be too high, automation would happen more rapidly.

Done right, automation increases the value created per labor hour. Which makes both UBI and humane jobs even more achievable. I'm all for it.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#305

Post by tremon »

RussianCow wrote: post #288
tremon wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turning your example around: if those teens were to receive UBI and McDonalds could hire them for only $3/hour instead of having to pay them full wage, some of the self-service kiosks might not have appeared, and the customers might have encountered better motivated workers?

Who would take a job for significantly less than they receive from the government?

The U in UBI stands for universal: everyone gets the same amount, regardless of whether they have a job. Taking a job is additive with UBI, there is no "significantly less money".

Under UBI, a government could do away with minimum wage completely because there is no coercion by necessity. The employer only needs to pay enough to make it worthwhile for the employee to show up.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#306

Post by pc86 »

roamerz wrote: post #158
pc86 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure some will. Some won't. So what? I'm not trying to be dismissive, but this strikes me as a "but some people will be upset!" argument, which seems irrelevant to whether the policy achieves its stated goals or not.

So what? Sounds like you should be part or a dictatorship rather than a democracy. If you support this idea then feel free to donate to the cause. Not trying to be an ass but the so what attitude does not tend to further constructive discussion.

I would love to know what democracy you live in where nobody is ever upset by democratic decisions.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#307

Post by CraigJPerry »

bitshiftfaced wrote: post #286
CraigJPerry wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t ring true. If you had the capital to make the decision not to work a crap-corp and instead pursue your dream “job” of being painter, musician, rock climbing explorer, artisanal fisherman, etc etc

What about everyone else who now also has the capital to pursue their dream job? Just as before basic income, there's many people competing for a finite number of dream jobs.

What about them? Comparatively enjoyable jobs will pay less, horrible jobs will pay more.

Want to “work” as a golfer? Cool, enjoy living on UBI because no one will be topping up your salary for that. The person who cuts the greens earns wayyyy more than you though. Want to play lots of golf? You’re going to run out of UBI to pay for all those greens fees. Maybe you need to think about taking on a side gig in a comfortable back office worker role (salary $1k/year), or a refuse collector (salary $130k/year).

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#308

Post by mongol »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #239
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can only do that if they collude, which is illegal. On the other hand, if food and rent are paid for mostly with UBI money, and supply was more elastic than demand, then prices would surely increase.

Did they collude to raise rents 10% this year? People will bid up apartments because they have more money.

Good point. Inflation will make UBI kind of pointless.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#309

Post by Aunche »

fma wrote: post #229
missedthecue wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm receiving $1000 a month for a six month program run by a university research group, which states very clearly that the program will end after six months, I'm not going to go quit my job. That's the problem with these "studies". They are completely different from a permanent government program. They can't tell you the impact on inflation, the impact on the labor market, or if it is affordable over the long term…

20+ year year old permanent program https://www.wired.com/story/free-money-the-surprising-effect...

Obviously, receiving free money is better than not receiving free money. There's nothing surprising about that. The question is where this money will come from. You can't support universal basic income from casinos or oil wealth, both of which have major negative externalities to boot.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#310

Post by parsimo2010 »

ozzythecat wrote: post #189
staticassertion wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If my job requires menial labor or involves getting berated by customers (many retail jobs), personally I would absolutely not work. Maybe that's a good thing. It's insane how people in service industries are treated - like they're less than human. Shifting some power to them and giving the job a little more of an air of dignity or status would probably help a lot. And the pay would obviously go up. People would be…

> Shifting some power to them and giving the job a little more of an air of dignity or status would probably help a lot. I agree, but is this feasible or wishful thinking? As a society, we’re decidedly split on whether we should wear masks or should or should not get vaccines, despite the science or despite whatever seems like a rational decision. (Admittedly I’m introducing my bias here). Would raising pay for retai…

I think what it would do is balance the power a little toward an employee’s favor instead of a customer. Right now there are people that have no choice but to work these jobs. So a company can institute a “customer is always right” policy because it keeps the customer around and they really don’t have to consider their employees feelings- they are easily replaced. Customers only act like assholes because they can get away with it- abuse the clerk, the manager comes out, customer gets free stuff. But if there was a basic income there might be fewer people willing to put up with abusive customers. If a company has a hard time replacing employees then it might have to reconsider their policy to be more like “accommodate reasonable customers but abusive customers can be kicked out.” This would probably happen over time, not immediately after implementing a basic income but I think it’s a good thing.

But I think the overall idea that companies would have to put a little more effort into their employee’s well being would be borne out if a country could commit to a basic income for long enough for the effects to shake out.

This is good behavior that companies would be forced into, not because of morals like respects and dignity, but because a mass exodus of employees would eventually hurt profits more than keeping unreasonable customers around.

Post reply on HN