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

Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

scottsantens.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 192 posts

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#101

Post by throwawa14223 »

drcongo wrote: post #94
throwawa14223 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your proposal that the USA needs to import more people we don't have work for so we can put them on UBI?

I'm not proposing anything. It's just inevitable that when a right wing throwaway account posts about anything, it's just so they can steer around to their favourite topic of The Foreigns.

At some point it has to come down to that. The USA is (mostly) not growing through birth so any proposal to gradually decrease the population has to include immigration. As AI advances I believe having a lower population will be a competitive advantage.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#102

Post by westmeal »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #32
plastic_enjoyer wrote: post #19

Billionaires want us dead

No, they want you alive. They want you to procreate. And they want you to be desperate enough to accept jobs on unfavourable terms, to make sure society continues to provide them with the luxuries they've become accustomed to. The only alternatives for those jobs will have to be "living on the streets" and "joining the military".

And when you join the military you're used as a tool to cement corporate power across the sea for... you guessed it!

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#103

Post by danielbln »

endominus wrote: post #81
danielbln wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things look pretty dystopian as it stands, and if concentration of wealth continues, we'll speed down that dark road even faster. If not UBI, what other solution is there? Especially as automation sweeps through cognitive work?

"We don't have a solution to fix it so let's try the solution that makes it worse" is not a very compelling argument.

That's OP's argument, I don't think UBI is a solution that makes things worse. That said, I'd like to know what the alternative could be, hence my line of questioning.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#104

Post by Gormo »

danielbln wrote: post #55
throwawa14223 wrote: post #46

[flagged]

Things look pretty dystopian as it stands, and if concentration of wealth continues, we'll speed down that dark road even faster. If not UBI, what other solution is there? Especially as automation sweeps through cognitive work?

What do you see is the fundamental problem with concentration of wealth (by which I assume you mean concentration of relative wealth, which seems to be what most people who discuss this topic are looking at)?

I'd agree that if absolute wealth is being concentrated, that could pose a serious problem, because it would ultimately make large swaths of the population dependent for their livelihoods on a small, centralized set of people who determine the disposition of wealth.

But I'm not sure how UBI -- a program that would make large swaths of the population dependent for their livelihoods on a small, centralized set of people who determine the disposition of wealth -- is a solution to this problem rather than a de jure entrenchment of it.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#105

Post by toomuchtodo »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #92
toomuchtodo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole "corporate profiteering drove inflation" narrative is/was entirely driven by click farming economically distressed people. It never was the case and even mild understanding of economics/finance quickly unravels the narrative. My citation is the Kansas City Fed in case you missed it.

If you read their research you will see that the reason corporations raised prices was because of future anticipation of costs rising - inflation. https://www.kansascityfed.org/research/economic-review/how-m...

I have read it. Have they lowered prices? Or have they held them high because they can?

https://www.ippr.org/media-office/revealed-how-powerful-comp...

https://www.axios.com/2023/05/18/once-a-fringe-theory-greedf... ("In March, the chief economist at UBS Global Wealth Management, Paul Donovan, published a note on "profit margin-led inflation," describing how in late 2022 and into this year, companies — particularly retailers and consumer goods makers — convinced consumers that they needed to raise prices. (They didn't really.)"

https://www.interest.co.nz/business/122533/paul-donovan-what... ("Paul Donovan on what profit-led inflation is, how it happens and how to combat it")

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard202.... ("Retail markups in a number of sectors have seen material increases in what could be described as a price–price spiral, whereby final prices have risen by more than the increases in input prices."

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/business/pepsico-earnings... | https://archive.today/RgxsB ("Price Increases Lead to Big Jump in Profit at PepsiCo")

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#106

Post by spiderfarmer »

throwawa14223 wrote: post #87
drcongo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aaaaand there it is.

Is your proposal that the USA needs to import more people we don't have work for so we can put them on UBI?

There are more than enough jobs. If your deepest fear is that people with different cultural backgrounds will replace people like you, you don't want have an actual debate about policy. You just want to remain in your safe space.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#107

Post by tivert »

Gormo wrote: post #90
bhouston wrote: post #3

Unrestricted campaign donations is a huge issue in US politics. It allows for the repeated undermining of democracy in favour of rich people's interests. It is anti-democratic to the core. And I do not mean rich people who are in the upper 10% of income, it favours the ultra rich for whom a $100,000 political donation is pocket change.

Only individuals are allowed to donate to political campaigns, and the FEC sets maximum contribution limits per individual that are far below $100,000. For this election cycle, the maximum campaign donation is $3,300, the cap for a committee donation is $2,000, etc. See: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate... I'm curious as to where you are seeing unrestricted donations. I'm also curious as t…

>> Unrestricted campaign donations is a huge issue in US politics. It allows for the repeated undermining of democracy in favour of rich people's interests. It is anti-democratic to the core.

> Only individuals are allowed to donate to political campaigns, and the FEC sets maximum contribution limits per individual that are far below $100,000.

> For this election cycle, the maximum campaign donation is $3,300, the cap for a committee donation is $2,000, etc. See: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate...

It's pretty obvious he probably wasn't referring specifically to hard-money campaign donations, but referring to the post Citizens United situation. That's pretty clear, if you don't read the comment pedantically and over-literally.

So a rich guy can give unlimited amounts to a candidate's Super PAC, an those have ways around the restrictions on coordinating with the campaign itself.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#108

Post by westmeal »

geodel wrote: post #53
endisneigh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only the folks who said eat the rich did just that.

Well that task is left to working class. We here are thought leaders.

I'm too busy working to be able to eat.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#109

Post by bluecalm »

spamizbad wrote: post #8

UBI's critics expected these programs to have terrible outcomes, where recipients would spend their money on trivialities (or worse: drugs). Instead, what we find is that UBI recipients either spend it on essentials, stuff for their kids children or paying down debt.

Yeah and if you get a blowjob for free every morning your life is going to be better as well. The problem is someone needs to be forced to provide it.

That's about how much those experiments are worth.

Re: Billionaire-Fueled Lobbying Group Behind the State Bills to Ban UBI Experiments

#110

Post by lenerdenator »

dagw wrote: post #95
aurareturn wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mainly wealth distribution. The top percent owns too much while the bottom 80% owns too little. There won't be inflation if you take money from the top and give it to the bottom. The total amount of money stays the same.

The 'bottom' spend a much large proportion of the income on 'stuff' that counts towards inflation than the the 'top'. If you take money out of rich peoples art and private jet budget and add it to poor peoples food and heating budget, then that can drive up inflation since food and heating make up a bigger part of the inflation calculation than art and private jets.

Because we've allocated more resources towards the production of art and private jets than towards essentials production.
Post reply on HN