Request For Research: Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#111

Post by grandalf » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:54 PM UTC

This is very interesting. I recall the first time I heard of a basic income proposal... Milton Friedman proposes it, calling it a "negative tax" in his book Capitalism and Freedom.

Some kind of welfare state is always going to be necessary, so the ideal proposal creates an incentive landscape that is both humane and also nudges citizens toward improving skills and working hard.

This is how we'd design a video game if we wanted to encourage socially responsible behavior. It's a silly accident of history that we haven't managed to do that in the real world.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#112

Post by samstave » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

ZainRiz wrote: post #23

notliketherest wrote: post #13

When I talk with people about basic income, my gut reaction and primary argument is that it contrasts with that fundamental human nature that's been show time and again throughout humanity - given a guaranteed, fixed reward no matter how much or how little you work for it, disincentivizes work. It follows along the same lines as why government instituted communism fails. Or why the first version of the mayflower comp…

I would think that it depends on what you consider "basic income". If it's just enough money to scrape by (tiny living quarters, food and a tiny amount for clothes/toilitries, etc) then people won't be worried about survival, but they'll still want to get more money for things like having a house, cell phone, vacations, etc

I just had a weird thought about cell phones;

I think that going forward, communications are a basic need. There was a startup in ~2008 that was attempting to provide "free" cellular service to its users who agreed to watch ads on their phones. If they interacted with the ads, they would get more service time...

The Facebook phone was an utter flop - however, if they wanted to surveil the population, they may have done better by creating a cell service company and allow people to be spied on in exchange for a free phone....

That damages my DNA saying that -- but it would be a workable model for the long tail of poor people that love facebook.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#113

Post by legohead » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

Not exactly research, but reading The Culture Series by Iain Banks [1] has caused me to give a lot of personal thought on the subject. When AI is advanced enough to dominate everything and humans are left to just do whatever, what will they do, and will they be happy? That's not the focus of the series, just a side effect.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_series

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#114

Post by glibgil » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

forrestthewoods wrote: post #76

Bernie Sanders at the recent town hall meeting asked for someone to tell a story of their struggles. A woman in tears told of how hard it was to get by on $10k to $12k a year. It makes me wonder. How happy will people who only get basic income be? How easy or difficult will it be for them to get simple work for a little extra income? Now there is a big difference in getting $10k for free vs scraping it together from…

Why shouldn't basic income be $36,000?

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#115

Post by rm_-rf_slash » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

danieltillett wrote: post #86

highCs wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens now if everybody is jobless, does the jobless still feel bad about it?

Based on what happens in remote communities here in Australia the result is not pretty. We basically have a basic income here in Australia via our welfare system. What we have found when everyone is jobless is there are huge levels of drug use, domestic violence, child abuse and general criminality. Other than this it works quite well.

I can't say I know much about Australian welfare systems, but here in the US it can be a bit of a trap, since welfare benefits drop fast once your savings or income rises, resulting in a huge disincentive to get off welfare, and furthering the sense of hopelessness, and presumably, the drug and alcohol use.

To what extent does Australian welfare gradually taper off as a means to incentivize saving, instead of punishing it?

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#116

Post by nickff » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

jdoliner wrote: post #59

davidw wrote: post #5

There's a very relevant section in this book ( The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies - http://amzn.to/1KFJ1Iu ) , that I just read last night: > "His view is strongly supported by the work of economist Andrew Oswald, who found that joblessness lasting six months or longer harms feelings of well-being and other measures of mental health about as much as the death of…

I've always wondered if its actually the joblessness that degrades people's self worth or the job search that must not be going to well and thus keeps them jobless. Would a person without a job but with a basic income and thus not feeling pressure to get a job experience the same hit to their self worth?

People value money they earn more highly than money they are given (, about twice as much from what I've read). In addition to that, many people get a sense of purpose from their work, as they feel they are contributing to something, and through a sense of fellow-feeling with their fellow workers, even though they may find it stressful and/or tedious.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#117

Post by malka » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

jeremysmyth wrote: post #31

notliketherest wrote: post #13

When I talk with people about basic income, my gut reaction and primary argument is that it contrasts with that fundamental human nature that's been show time and again throughout humanity - given a guaranteed, fixed reward no matter how much or how little you work for it, disincentivizes work. It follows along the same lines as why government instituted communism fails. Or why the first version of the mayflower comp…

...given a guaranteed, fixed reward no matter how much or how little you work for it, disincentivizes work...I just think that socialism and communism (which basic income basically is...) Wrong. Basic income lifts the floor. It does not concern itself with the ceiling. Calling it communism is utterly wrong and completely missing the point.

I'd go as far as saying that it is a liberal (in the sense classical liberal) idea.

Basic income recognizes the idea of a labor market, but admits that this market is neither pure nor perfect: the jobs seeker are in an unstable situation that they have to get out of to pay their bills.

Therefore the employer has an edge in the market.

By decoupling the revenu and the employment, the job seekers can make better decision for themselves.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#118

Post by RankingMember » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:55 PM UTC

I'm curious to see how Finland's basic income system turns out. I think doing so would drop the omnipresent fear of being destitute and homeless, which would do a lot to improve mental health.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#119

Post by dcre » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:56 PM UTC

chubot wrote: post #46

My personal viewpoint is that you should be guaranteed survival and some opportunity by society, but not guaranteed income. That is, you should get food, shelter, medical care, and education for free (this also implies free child care). But you don't get to buy a cell phone or an XBox or whatever -- you have to work for that. In other words, I think basic income is jumping the gun a bit. Who is going to PAY for this,…

Seems like you're mixing up two arguments. Is the problem the cost, or the particular things provided?

If the latter, who gets to decide what's essential and what's not? I'd be pretty useless without a cell phone and a laptop.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#120

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Jan 27, 2016, 7:56 PM UTC

The problem with basic income is that people need purpose, not charity. Look at the success of programs in Africa that give people the ability to make a living, not a bag of rice. One particularly moving story was about a group that got foot-powered water pumps into the hands of subsistence farmers, who subsequently were able to send their kids to school.

At one point, the core purpose of monetary policy and central banking was full employment. Now, it seems to be stability and productivity. The political system is too corrupt to pivot -- but the private sector can, because untapped potential represents lost customers.

I think we need to figure out how to empower people. We have all of these underserved communities that suffer mostly from hopelessness. How do we empower a handyman in the inner city to build a sustainable business that enjoys his neighbors? How do we bring vitality to a rural community marginalized by the death of farming and mills?