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

Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

simulacrum.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 681 posts

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#141

Post by penguindev »

dllthomas wrote: post #131
penguindev wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be far more worried about this sending a false prosperity signal that could exacerbate our already insane and unsustainable population levels. What's really depressing is that not a single comment here or on the article even mentions this. Why the hell should I pay even more and subsidize those who have more than two kids?

I don't think the number of kids goes up with prosperity. Developed countries and upper classes typically have much lower birth rates than their counterparts, and some countries are even experiencing negative population growth.

I agree, but in depressions/recessions it goes down quite reliably. It's a strong signal

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#142

Post by streptomycin »

cdoxsey wrote: post #59

I think in the end this wouldn't work. It'd play out something like this: A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to. (Particularly when politicians push the basic income amount up to placate constituencies) Because workers bow out of the system certain industries lose productive capacity. Maybe we stop producing enough food, or enough fuel. Prices rise (assuming a…

A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to.

True. The problem is, as things are now, a certain percentage of the population will be forced to stop working as they are made obsolete by increasingly efficient globalization and automation. As that percentage increases, eventually either society will collapse or something fundamental will have to change (such as implementing a basic income).

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#143

Post by redwood »

crazygringo wrote: post #73

> "How would we pay for it? We could start by getting corporations to pay their taxes." I don't know why people keep harping on corporate taxes. If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Taxing corporations doesn't produce magic money -- it's still taxing people in the end, but it's the consumers.…

My feeling is that corporations shouldn't have a disincentive to make money.

Rather all ways of extracting money from corporations should be taxed at a high income tax level (rather than the low dividend and capital gains levels).

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#144

Post by dragonwriter »

cdoxsey wrote: post #126
summerdown2 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to. Everyone I've ever seen argue this has had strong opinions about how other (more greedy and venal) people would act. They, of course, would still work, but the great unwashed masses would sit on their backsides and take the money. I suggest, instead, we try specifics. Given a basic income, I wouldn't be lazy. Nor would…

They, of course, would still work, but the great unwashed masses would sit on their backsides and take the money. The counter argument would be the existence of industries that people will already not work in. For example Italy has a 38.5% youth unemployment rate. It also can't get enough workers for the garment industry. So why don't the youth of Italy want these jobs? Maybe the work is seen as menial (so a cultural…

> The same can be said in this country with the absurdly low unemployment rate in North Dakota while the disability rate has shot through the roof. Unless you think people have suddenly and inexplicably become disabled this is clear evidence that people are willing to go on the Government dole rather than get a job in North Dakota.

Or, people who are able-bodied and unemployed have chosen to move out of North Dakota (perhaps due to work available elsewhere), and/or people who are disabled have chosen to move to North Dakota for financial or environmental or other reasons. Either of these would both reduce the rate of unemployment and increase the rate of disability without people "choosing to go on the Government dole".

> The question is: how many people currently working would stop working if they didn't need to?

The price consequences of BI are such that this is self-limiting. Once you set a level of BI, the more people choose to opt out of work, the less affordable it is for people to choose to opt out of work. Less people working -> higher market clearing cost of labor -> higher market clearing cost of all goods and services -> reduced standard of living for people on fixed incomes (including whatever point the BI is set at.)

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#145

Post by a_c_s »

crazygringo wrote: post #123
dragonwriter wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything, taxing corporations is regressive No, its not. > the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. It increases producer prices which shifts the supply curve to the right, but its pretty self-evident that the effect on actual prices is dependent on price elasticity of demand in the markets for particular products, and that price elasticity…

> but its pretty self-evident that the effect on actual prices is dependent on price elasticity of demand in the markets for particular products Of course, but there's still the "minimum profitability" that a business seeks to have. Suppose three firms compete to sell widget X, and consumers are willing to pay up to $10 for it, but the companies sell it at $5 due to competition (it costs $4 to make and distribute). T…

But 'reasonable profit' isn't a constant. Just look at the airline industry - no single airline has had a consistent profit margin (most have not even been consistently profitable!). Thin margins aren't incentive to leave an industry - if they were then grocery stores would not exist (as they all have razor thin margins) and WalMart, Target, Kmart would all have switched industries.

In your example, if taxes of $0.50 are added, the firm may still sell widgets at the post-tax price of $5 and accept the reduction in margin from $1 to $0.50.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#146

Post by jellicle »

crazygringo wrote: post #73

> "How would we pay for it? We could start by getting corporations to pay their taxes." I don't know why people keep harping on corporate taxes. If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Taxing corporations doesn't produce magic money -- it's still taxing people in the end, but it's the consumers.…

> If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels.

Actually, the studies show that corporate taxes are essentially a proxy for the taxing the ultra-wealthy - a cut in the corporate tax rate is very similar to cutting the highest marginal income tax rate.

After all, if corporate taxes truly fell on the poor, Republicans wouldn't be for cutting them.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#147

Post by rdouble »

cdoxsey wrote: post #126
summerdown2 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to. Everyone I've ever seen argue this has had strong opinions about how other (more greedy and venal) people would act. They, of course, would still work, but the great unwashed masses would sit on their backsides and take the money. I suggest, instead, we try specifics. Given a basic income, I wouldn't be lazy. Nor would…

They, of course, would still work, but the great unwashed masses would sit on their backsides and take the money. The counter argument would be the existence of industries that people will already not work in. For example Italy has a 38.5% youth unemployment rate. It also can't get enough workers for the garment industry. So why don't the youth of Italy want these jobs? Maybe the work is seen as menial (so a cultural…

Although the unemployment rate is low in North Dakota there are actually only about 17,000 open jobs. This wouldn't even employ all the unemployed people from Minneapolis.

Compounding the issue are a lack of housing, and the fact that over half of those positions are low paying dead end jobs like fast food, walmart, etc. It's also very far away from almost everywhere - a four to nine hour drive from the closest major airport.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#148

Post by big_lou »

redwood wrote: post #143
crazygringo wrote: post #73

> "How would we pay for it? We could start by getting corporations to pay their taxes." I don't know why people keep harping on corporate taxes. If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Taxing corporations doesn't produce magic money -- it's still taxing people in the end, but it's the consumers.…

My feeling is that corporations shouldn't have a disincentive to make money. Rather all ways of extracting money from corporations should be taxed at a high income tax level (rather than the low dividend and capital gains levels).

So corporations should have literally zero disincentive to make money? Is that what you intend to argue? Because that seems to imply that corporations should be completely unfettered in every conceivable way, be it legal, economic, ethical, or otherwise. Am I missing something there?

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#149

Post by unclebucknasty »

crazygringo wrote: post #123
dragonwriter wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything, taxing corporations is regressive No, its not. > the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. It increases producer prices which shifts the supply curve to the right, but its pretty self-evident that the effect on actual prices is dependent on price elasticity of demand in the markets for particular products, and that price elasticity…

> but its pretty self-evident that the effect on actual prices is dependent on price elasticity of demand in the markets for particular products Of course, but there's still the "minimum profitability" that a business seeks to have. Suppose three firms compete to sell widget X, and consumers are willing to pay up to $10 for it, but the companies sell it at $5 due to competition (it costs $4 to make and distribute). T…

>"corporate taxes are ultimately passed onto people"

I don't really get this argument. It's always made as if the taxes are applied in a vacuum where market forces no longer exist.

If corporations are operating in a competitive market, they will seek cost advantages and continue to compete for market share. Raised taxes represent an additional expense (for the purposes of this discussion), much like raised energy prices. It is not always the case that these costs are passed on to consumers. Rather, smart companies seek to become more efficient, reduce costs elsewhere, or even realize a slightly lower profit margin per unit in order to maintain or increase market share vs. other competitors.

There's also the option to reduce executive compensation, decrease shareholder dividends, and a host of other options available in the interest of remaining competitive. A smart company could actually outmaneuver other competitors, wind up with more volume, realize the same net profit after taxes, and pass lower prices on to consumers.

I mean, there are just a ton of other variables here. And, those who advocate low or no corporate taxes are frequently free marketers. So, it's very interesting to me that they all but completely ignore very relevant free market mechanisms that can countervail the effects of raised corporate taxes.

IMO, it's just an oft-repeated meme that "higher corporate taxes are automatically regressive because they automatically create higher prices for consumers".

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#150

Post by dgallagher »

Every single adult member receives a weekly payment from the state, which is enough to live comfortably on. The only condition is citizenship and/or residency.

Sweet! None of us have to work anymore! Party at my place every night for life!

You get the basic income whether or not you’re employed, any wages you earn are additional.

Few, that's a relief. It'll be nice to close all of the school's down and tell kids they can go home, play video games indefinitely, and never have to worry about their future again.

The welfare bureaucracy is largely dismantled. No means testing, no signing on, no bullying young people into stacking shelves for free, no separate state pension.

Down with welfare, up with communism!

Employment law is liberalised, as workers no longer need to fear dismissal.

Hey boss, fuck you! Why? Because fuck you, that's why! What are you going to do about it? Fire me? Ha!

People work for jobs that are available in order to increase their disposable income.

That's cool. Make sure to tax them high enough to pay for all of my house parties.

Large swathes of the economy are replaced by volunteerism, a continuation of the current trend.

Who wants to volunteer to clean my toilet and mow my lawn? Anyone? Even if I say thank you when you're done?

The system would be harder to cheat when there’s only a single category of claimant, with no extraordinary allowances.

I can't figure a way to game it either; it's mathematically and economically perfect!

Post reply on HN