UBI as a productivity dividend • Hacker News Board

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#71

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 6:57 PM UTC

estearum wrote: post #67

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a progessive state government. I am considering legislation for the next fiscal year. I have come to learn that 100% of private landlords have increased their rents by the full amount of the UBI we introduced last year. I ban private rentals and/or private ownership of homes and/or introduce strict rent control policies (depending on precisely how progressive we're feeling this year). Congrats, mission accomplis…

Yes! Excellent work. Now there is no incentive for anyone to build housing for our growing population!

Indeed, a critical problem. But wait ... what's that? You say there are places where the state builds housing? How could it be?

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#72

Post by estearum » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 6:58 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #66

estimator7292 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because tenants are not scarce. If you cut your prices, you lose $200/mo forever. If you simply follow the maximum market price and wait, someone will fill your room eventually and you have them locked into a higher rate forever. Competition doesn't work for necessities. Someone will rent your room at any price because it's necessary for survival. One of the major crises of our time is the fact that there are more pe…

Everything you've written here presupposes a housing shortage. Fixing the housing shortage is a central tenet of progressive policies (regardless of whether or not they may ever actually accomplish this).

Housing will always fall short of demand. Nobody, progressive or not, is actually willing to sustain an oversupply of housing.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#73

Post by EGG_CREAM » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 6:59 PM UTC

estearum wrote: post #67

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a progessive state government. I am considering legislation for the next fiscal year. I have come to learn that 100% of private landlords have increased their rents by the full amount of the UBI we introduced last year. I ban private rentals and/or private ownership of homes and/or introduce strict rent control policies (depending on precisely how progressive we're feeling this year). Congrats, mission accomplis…

Yes! Excellent work. Now there is no incentive for anyone to build housing for our growing population!

I am a progressive government. The free market has failed to provide a necessary service. So now I pass a law that creates a not for profit contractor that builds houses. It’s not that complicated. We do it with fire departments, police, and many other services already. Free market might have been more efficient theoretically, but when it fails in practice we find another solution.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#74

Post by davyAdewoyin » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 6:59 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #31

estearum wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter at all how much it is. It'll be (almost entirely or entirely) eaten by landlords. I am a landlord. I am setting prices for renewal. I have come to learn that 100% of my possible customer base now has $200/mo more to spend. I raise prices $200/mo with absolute certainty that I will find a renter. Congrats, mission accomplished.

How do you control what other landlords do? Why won't any undercut you by $200 and get your tenants?

It doesn't matter, because land is scarce resource

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#75

Post by estearum » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:00 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #71

estearum wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! Excellent work. Now there is no incentive for anyone to build housing for our growing population!

Indeed, a critical problem. But wait ... what's that? You say there are places where the state builds housing? How could it be?

Sure but now you're not just talking about UBI, are you?

You're now talking about UBI, plus rent controls, plus state-built housing.

All to make UBI actually do anything at all other than enrich existing landlords.

Why don't we just skip the UBI and the rent controls and instead just have the state build housing?

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#76

Post by K0balt » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:00 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #49

K0balt wrote: post #37

UBI is the actual solution, and is well understood enough now to know that most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Unfortunately, with regulatory capture at near 100 percent and electoral capture almost as bad, there is no incentive structure with sufficient influence to make it happen. Wealth will continue to be funneled to the top, and taxation schemes that act as a de-facto sales tax…

> most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods What are the falsehoods in complaints against police unions?

lol. I typed ubi is and the autocorrect put “unions.” It has been corrected . But it is kinda funny anyway.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#77

Post by estearum » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:01 PM UTC

EGG_CREAM wrote: post #73

estearum wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! Excellent work. Now there is no incentive for anyone to build housing for our growing population!

I am a progressive government. The free market has failed to provide a necessary service. So now I pass a law that creates a not for profit contractor that builds houses. It’s not that complicated. We do it with fire departments, police, and many other services already. Free market might have been more efficient theoretically, but when it fails in practice we find another solution.

Yes, so un-complicated that we're now talking about state-built housing just to make UBI do anything other than enrich landlords.

UBI is a bad idea.

State-built housing is not necessarily a bad idea.

You can just do the latter and skip the former.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#78

Post by K0balt » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:02 PM UTC

dmitrygr wrote: post #45

K0balt wrote: post #37

UBI is the actual solution, and is well understood enough now to know that most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Unfortunately, with regulatory capture at near 100 percent and electoral capture almost as bad, there is no incentive structure with sufficient influence to make it happen. Wealth will continue to be funneled to the top, and taxation schemes that act as a de-facto sales tax…

> most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Ah the “I am sure we can all agree … that I’m right” argument. In actuality, there are plenty of very good arguments against unions. That you don’t like them changes nothing

lol “unions” was thanks to AI deciding “ubi is” couldn’t be what I meant. This might be saying something about the possibility of this working out.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#79

Post by estearum » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:02 PM UTC

NicuCalcea wrote: post #47

estearum wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the subsidies aren't on top of base income? The subsidy isn't the problem per se, it's the net increase in income. It is obviously self-evident everywhere that high incomes create high cost of living, which can be traced through higher costs all the way down to the land rents (the rent someone is willing to pay to have market access to the high local incomes).

I don't see why UBI would necessarily be an increase of income for everyone. It could be that, but it could also be a decrease in hours worked, or a more equal distribution of wealth, or any combination of these. I don't want a higher income, I want to benefit from the productivity gains I and everyone else made happen by having more time to do things I like.

> I don't want a higher income, I want to benefit from the productivity gains I and everyone else made happen by having more time to do things I like.

Why don't you just do that now and work half the amount of hours you're currently working?

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#80

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Sat, Mar 14, 2026, 7:02 PM UTC

estearum wrote: post #75

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, a critical problem. But wait ... what's that? You say there are places where the state builds housing? How could it be?

Sure but now you're not just talking about UBI, are you? You're now talking about UBI, plus rent controls, plus state-built housing. All to make UBI actually do anything at all other than enrich existing landlords. Why don't we just skip the UBI and the rent controls and instead just have the state build housing?

Because UBI is largely orthogonal to those things. It's a way of taking productivity gains and ensuring that the entire population benefits from them.