Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult • Hacker News Board

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#481

Post by gnaritas » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 3:56 AM UTC

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #420

gnaritas wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why care if you do a good job if losing it doesn't really impact you that negatively? That statement says a lot about how you think; everyone is not like you. Many people take pride in what they do and do it well regardless of compensation, it's not about the money, it's about the fulfillment one gets from a job well done.

I think this shows you are disconnected from how the world really is outside of fairly small bubble, just being honest. Recognizing reality does not mean that you personally have some fundamental flaw in how to view work.

My friend, you're in the bubble.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#482

Post by aidenn0 » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 3:57 AM UTC

enjoy-your-stay wrote: post #430

Dewie wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't just use the proposed Swiss basic income for your calculations for another country. Switzerland has a higher cost of living than most countries.

Indeed. After paying your rent and (mandatory) health insurance there wouldn't be very much left. Somebody in this thread also mentioned that it's a luxury to own any car in Switzerland - but that's just not true at all. In fact many apartment blocks have underground garages for cars. It's just that with such an excellent public transport system (really it's unbelievably fantastic) you can pretty easily get by withou…

Seeing that a luxury is something that is not a necessity, the statement "you can pretty easily get by without a car" demonstrates that it is a luxury to own a car.

In most of the US, it is a necessity to own a car, as you probably can't get to work without one.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#483

Post by sytelus » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:34 AM UTC

Obviously people proposing this aren't thinking it through or have no training in basic economics. Intuitively you can think of money as amount of labor that you owe from other human beings [1]. So let's say in some country you need minimum of $1000 /mo to satisfy your basic needs. What this means is that someone needs to grow your food, weave your cloths, run electricity plants etc and that amount of labor costs $1000 at the moment. Now imagine a government suddenly guarantees $2000 of income to everyone. What happens next? A lot of these people who were supposed to grow food for you, weave your cloths and run electricity plants for you will drop out of labor market. This means human labor gets in less supply and its demand suddenly increases. That means cost of labor suddenly increases. That means very soon $2000 is no longer enough to buy enough labor to satisfy your basic needs. In essence, $3000 would now be new minimum that is required for your basic needs. You are back to the square one with only effect being government essentially inflated the currency.

[1] In this simplification we assume that most raw material required to satisfy basic needs is available in sufficient quantity so the cost of goods is strongly a function of human labor rather than raw material.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#484

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:37 AM UTC

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #427

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>these models are notorious for not working out well. I guess you know because you've seen it tried so many times? Here is a fact for your non-economist economic model. Automation is displacing labor. And, here is a prediction: Automation will continue to displace labor until most menial labor tasks are gone.

That's not a response. All you really said was: "Because robots ..." You didn't really counter the argument against inflation. It's actually a very reasonable position, the appearance of Cylons really doesn't change anything.

Who gives a crap about inflation? Inflation is a given in any foreseeable future. It doesn't matter. An equilibrium will be reached or all hell will break loose.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#485

Post by dinkumthinkum » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:39 AM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #481

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this shows you are disconnected from how the world really is outside of fairly small bubble, just being honest. Recognizing reality does not mean that you personally have some fundamental flaw in how to view work.

My friend, you're in the bubble.

How am I in a bubble? You've got to be kidding me. I mean what you're suggesting is ludicrous idealism. You think everyone views work the same as you. I suppose you think everyone also shares the common HN view of a total lackl of interest in money for anything other than the most basic needs.

If you believe this utter nonsense then you have not seen much of the world.

I do not mindlessly ascribe my value system to the rest world, you have to take the world for what it is and not what your quixotic idealism would have you believe.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#486

Post by chii » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:41 AM UTC

sytelus wrote: post #483

Obviously people proposing this aren't thinking it through or have no training in basic economics. Intuitively you can think of money as amount of labor that you owe from other human beings [1]. So let's say in some country you need minimum of $1000 /mo to satisfy your basic needs. What this means is that someone needs to grow your food, weave your cloths, run electricity plants etc and that amount of labor costs $10…

This argument assumes that the efficiency cannot be increased, and stays at X amount of "work" per human.

Imagine if the basic income enabled large amount of people to try out different inventions, or perform research, such that it now takes only 1/2 X to produce food, where as before it was X. One way this could happen is that because labour costs increased, more automation is encouraged/deployed, and thus gain efficiency.

Of course, if the above _doesn't_ happen, then yes, your conclusion is pretty spot on.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#487

Post by sytelus » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:46 AM UTC

sytelus wrote: post #483

Obviously people proposing this aren't thinking it through or have no training in basic economics. Intuitively you can think of money as amount of labor that you owe from other human beings [1]. So let's say in some country you need minimum of $1000 /mo to satisfy your basic needs. What this means is that someone needs to grow your food, weave your cloths, run electricity plants etc and that amount of labor costs $10…

This point is also very important to understand for all those people whose primary life goal is to retire before 30s or gain "financial independence" so you never have to work again. When you are working, you are making your portion of human labor available in exchange for other people's labor who are working to get food on your table or build roads for you or design safety for your car and so on. When you get out of contributing any labor to the market you are essentially sucking blood off of all the people are actually working to make your life style possible. So ethically, "retiring before 30" and "gaining financial independence" so you never have to worry about giving back to society while benefiting from everybody else's work is wrong. This I believe is also a reason why some people are uncomfortable disclosing these fantasies publicly.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#488

Post by dinkumthinkum » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 4:49 AM UTC

powertower wrote: post #403

DanBC wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where e.g. many muslim immigrants refuse to assimilate to the point of wanting to be governed by separate sets of laws. (Mildly interesting that you mention Muslims and sharia, but don't mention Jews and Beth Din). There are some serious failures of the UK method - faith schools are a scary abomination; Beth Din and Sharia courts have led to child abusers and wife beaters not being reported to police, but just movi…

That's an interesting word - Assimilation. I have no idea if you're maybe trying to rather quote "integration", or if in the UK the word "assimilation" is used some other way then it is in the US, but... Assimilation is something that the Borg does. It can be forceful and is primarily an act of the collective. "Integration" on the other hand comes from a desire to be part of a society. It's more of a soft osmosis typ…

That word is used commonly in the US in political discussions. It is probably more correct than integrate.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#489

Post by dinkumthinkum » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 5:01 AM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #356

fab13n wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About poorly paid boring jobs: either they're socially necessary and will command higher wages, or they're not worth it, and we'll manage without them. The main interest of minimal income is to shift the power balance between employer and employees: today, most employees have a choice between complying and starving. Actually in many countries they have to do both. With minimal income, it becomes a choice between comp…

> today, most employees have a choice between complying and starving Really? What's the grand total number of starvation deaths in United States or Switzerland?

People go hungry in the US. To suggest otherwise is, frankly stupid. People go hungry and people are poor enough that their main options for food are cheap, unhealthy, high caloric. So is it your contention there are no charity soup kitchens or charity groceries in the US, because you seem to imply it.

Re: Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

#490

Post by icelancer » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 5:03 AM UTC

JDulin wrote: post #305

eatitraw wrote: post #176

There are so many people excited about all these "equality" bills, and nobody criticizes it. So I'll just leave it there: http://paulgraham.com/inequality.html

I agree with almost everything pg said in that essay. But I also agree that the the best economy of the future will (someday) include a minimum living wage like this. That's because it's not a bill in pursuit of some Utopian equality: It's a survival bill. Giving someone $2,800 a month without explicitly taxing the rich to fund it is hardly an attempt at eliminating income inequality. I would call this type of wage a…

It will also be necessary as productivity continues to climb through innovation and automation. Low/no-skill jobs are being removed from the economy in huge swaths.