It Is Time For Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#121

Post by cookingrobot » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:42 AM UTC

brenschluss wrote: post #102

gkoz wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you assume people would be spending their BI rationally? Spending everything on gambling and drugs would still be possible, having more than the least possible income by shady means would still appeal to some. It seems to me reasons for crime wouldn't be exactly destroyed.

If BI was disbursed bi-weekly, then "Spending everything" wouldn't be a catastrophic failure. It's not like you'd be sitting on a pot of gold. What if BI was disbursed daily, even? You would never amass enough money to "spend everything" on gambling on drugs...

It could be distributed by the second. Hopefully it just drips into your bank and you can use a chargecard.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#122

Post by mcherm » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:42 AM UTC

chavesn wrote: post #61

derefr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alaska has its Permanent Fund Dividend, which is a kind of basic income coming from state oil sales. How hard is it to get Alaskan citizenship?

Um, one small difference, you have to be a resident of Alaska for at least a year, intend to remain a permanent resident and not be absent more than 180 days without a valid reason. [1] [1]: http://pfd.alaska.gov/Eligibility/EligibilityRequirements

All reasonable restrictions to apply to a national Basic Income program.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#123

Post by sliverstorm » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:43 AM UTC

conanbatt wrote: post #96

benched wrote: post #22

The idea that you absolutely must work hard in exchange for the necessities of your life, is so deeply ingrained in our collective consciousness, like a fundamental law of conservation, that it seems a lot of people cannot conceive otherwise.

This might be true in the US, where both political parties are right-wing and flaunt "socialist" as a curse-word every day. I think BI is something that cant and shouldnt happen country-wide one day to the other. Cities should start doing it first. Cities like.. SF? which have a ridicolous surplus of money the city squanders, while still having a lower class without medical care.

SF already tried giving homeless people a stipend.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#124

Post by ryandrake » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:44 AM UTC

gregcrv wrote: post #15

Another missed advantage: it moves the job market from demand/supply type of market to easy/difficult type of market: the highest paid jobs will be the ones nobody wants to do.

That would mean the CEO would be the lowest paid employee at every company.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#125

Post by sesteel » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:45 AM UTC

MartinCron wrote: post #80

tomphoolery wrote: post #64

Providing a basic income for all people, regardless of their merit to the society as a whole, is problematic. It's not enough to just hand over a couple hundred dollars to someone and say "have fun". We need to ensure everyone is getting the proper basic services, first. I'm talking about shelter, food, water, and a basis for living comfortably. We have the resources to do this, today. We just don't have the distribu…

I agree. Meeting basic human needs through other means seems to be a necessary prerequisite to basic income.

I kindly disagree. I would prefer a system where a basic income is distributed (simply for the efficiency) and those that receive it are educated on how to spend it to meet their basic needs. This could be integrated into school curriculum, online courses, etc.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#126

Post by jgalt212 » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:46 AM UTC

The real problem is all the tax loopholes that almost exclusively benefit the upper/upper end of the income spectrum.

I am looking at you carried interest loophole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carried_interest

And the low rate dividends are taxed at. Dividends should be deducted at the corporate level as a cost, and taxed at the shareholder level as regular income.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#127

Post by atom-morgan » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:46 AM UTC

whyme wrote: post #48

Obviously this is not a new idea... Twenty years ago I sat around with college mates, in Canada, listing the merits of the "Guaranteed Income" and quite frankly I still support the idea today. If you took all the salaries, property and operations cost associated with distributing old age security, welfare, disability, unemployment wages etc etc, it would probably pay for much of the cost associated with the Guarantee…

...that eliminates money all together

You can't eliminate money. It's a natural creation of human interaction. Even prisoners have money.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#128

Post by randomdata » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:47 AM UTC

avmich wrote: post #43

benched wrote: post #22

The idea that you absolutely must work hard in exchange for the necessities of your life, is so deeply ingrained in our collective consciousness, like a fundamental law of conservation, that it seems a lot of people cannot conceive otherwise.

Twenty years ago a lot of people couldn't see themselves using a cellphone or an Internet.

I seem to remember that in 1994 most people understood the usefulness of both technologies, especially cell phones. Cost was the real hinderance. Though if we go one more year, by 1995, internet access was starting to become common in the home.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#129

Post by brianpgordon » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:47 AM UTC

dicroce wrote: post #69

Here's the thing: I believe that millions of years of evolution have baked into every living thing a deep need to work, and we'll feel bad if we don't (because for millions of years lazyness meant death). We need to struggle. Further, I think we need to bad times to help us recognize the good times and a basic income would do much to soften those bad times... I worry that Basic Income is in the long term practically…

1. I think you underestimate the daily hell of the lives of workers who hate their jobs. There are millions of people out there who are homeless because they'd rather sleep outside than perform the jobs available to them.

2. People who are forced to work two (or more) jobs to stay afloat are struggling way more than could conceivably be incentivized by evolution. I can't imagine how miserable and downtrodden people must be who have no weekend to look forward to in which to pursue their interests.

3. I don't believe that doing something meaningless like sweeping floors or checking groceries fills any kind of psychological need. I've personally gone a few months before without doing any kind of work, and it was glorious.

4. What about all of those psychological needs (family, relationships, hobbies) which people compromise for the sake of work?

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#130

Post by sliverstorm » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 12:47 AM UTC

encoderer wrote: post #106

Retric wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To make things simple let's assume a flat tax of 20% pays a 10k per year basic income. Someone making 0k ends up with .8 * 0k + 10k = 10k. Someone making 10k ends up with .8 * 10k + 10k = 18k. Someone making 50k ends up with .8 * 50k + 10k = 50k. Someone making 100k ends up with .8 * 100k + 10k = 90k. Someone making 200k ends up with .8 * 200k + 10k = 170k. Thus the only people that get the full amount are those who…

US Personal income is about $13tn, so a 20% flat tax would currently provide about $8500/yr basic income. And that, of course, is on top of our current government spending. Also I'm not sure what you'd do w/ payroll taxes. You're just grossly understating what tax rates would have to be to accommodate this. You think there will be economies of scale that SS today doesn't already achieve that could somehow offset this…

So then to lift everyone out of poverty, we just need a 40% flat tax on top of the current federal taxes (so that we can continue to fund everything else). Hooray, 70% tax rate!