A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory • Hacker News Board

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#111

Post by dagw » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:13 AM UTC

anticon wrote: post #73

Fuxy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would wager there will be people who will take advantage of the system and use it as a opportunity to not work and laze around all day however those people will be the one who are not particularly productive in their work anyway. They might find something else to do they might not but that's OK it is an acceptable loss. On the other end companies which used to take advantage of the job market and the fact that ever…

You don't mention the fact it's completely unworkable mathematically. In the UK I believe it'd cost £240 billion a year. Where the hell would anyone be able to find that money from? (Tackling tax avoidance from Starbucks isn't a credible answer). Just to put it in context, that's twice the entire NHS's budget, or 5 times our defence spending.

To put it further into context £240 billion is slightly less than what the UK government spends on pensions and welfare. Since basic income would replace much of the need for pensions and welfare, it might just end up more or less balancing out.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#112

Post by atlih » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:13 AM UTC

anticon wrote: post #73

Fuxy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would wager there will be people who will take advantage of the system and use it as a opportunity to not work and laze around all day however those people will be the one who are not particularly productive in their work anyway. They might find something else to do they might not but that's OK it is an acceptable loss. On the other end companies which used to take advantage of the job market and the fact that ever…

You don't mention the fact it's completely unworkable mathematically. In the UK I believe it'd cost £240 billion a year. Where the hell would anyone be able to find that money from? (Tackling tax avoidance from Starbucks isn't a credible answer). Just to put it in context, that's twice the entire NHS's budget, or 5 times our defence spending.

They would get it from economic growth among other things.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#113

Post by megalodon » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:13 AM UTC

anticon wrote: post #52

onion2k wrote: post #33

One of the first pieces of advice I had when my company landed its investment was to pay ourselves a decent (not extravagant) wage so that my time went on worrying about the company rather than how I was going to afford to do things in my personal life. The same is true for employees - if they're paid a good living they will spend more time on thinking about problems in their job instead. If a government were to do t…

People starting companies are driven, determined people who want to create things. The vast majority of people are not. You're vastly over-estimating the general population. The majority are lazy, and if given money, will sit watching reality TV and stuffing their face with ice cream. (Step outside the startup bubble for a while). Most people are also selfish. The idea that they'll all start doing things to benefit o…

Are you that scared that it might work? It's a social experiment carried out by the government, not judgement day. Let's see what result it produces before rejecting it.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#114

Post by celticninja » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:13 AM UTC

anticon wrote: post #64

Sir_Substance wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The vast majority of people are not. You're vastly over-estimating the general population. The majority are lazy, and if given money, will sit watching reality TV and stuffing their face with ice cream. I've always felt that this argument against basic minimum income said more about the arguer than society at large. In my experience, everyone has a personal project that gets sidelined for their work.

Seriously? Do you not think you're in a bubble of 1%ers? Most people aren't itching to start a company you know... Most want to watch American Idol and do nothing.

I think you need to define most. Where is your sample data? You have a biased opinion and you are sticking to it it seems.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#115

Post by noreasonw » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:15 AM UTC

The problem I see with any basic income scheme is that lazy people can get in the trap to become trapped in a lazy for ever state. Basic income should be accompanied with a policy to motivate people to develop their capabilities and enhance their self confidence. Once you are trapped in the basic income scheme and automation replaces all the low skilled jobs, lazy people can see themselves as completely disposable objects, so you need a great self-confidence and a change of mentality to change from a lazy people to a do it person.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#116

Post by linker3000 » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:15 AM UTC

mohawk wrote: post #101

piokoch wrote: post #77

When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that? I assume the money will not be printed (this would not help, as inflation would make that income very small). So the country that applies such policy must have some way of finding money. Some countries have natural resources that they can sell, so the problem is solved. But how about the rest? I guess this will be finan…

> When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that? Just look at all the social "safety nets" that many European countries have. That money then gets relabled "basic income". Pensions, unemployment benefits, paid sick leave, child support money, etc... For people who are working full-time and don't get anything at the moment, the taxes would have to be increased slight…

> When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that?

The real question is why are we hindering the whole of humanity in terms of social development, medical and technical research, environmental management and..pretty much everything.. because we are beholden to an artificial system of numerical control (ie: money and finance) which we invented as a tool for stability and control, but has become a total, fucked-up liablity because the numbers don't line up properly and has large parts of the world limiting themselves artificially (ie: austerity measures) just to make the digits on a spreadsheet tick over in the right way.

We need to reset, respawn and start again.

Edit: And because my original post doesn't make it clear, I mean we need something other than 'money', ie: get rid of the whole damn concept, or reengineer it completely - something a few notches below 'shoot all the bankers and accountants'.

..and now back to my day job in support.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#117

Post by DanBC » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:16 AM UTC

caminante wrote: post #69

DanBC wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plenty of European examples abound where despite generous - some would argue very generous - state dispensed benefits certain sections of the society just do not respond positively in measures of improvement of their own station in life much less "working on things to improve everyone's else (lives)". For many years people on English out of work benefits were not allowed to do voluntary work or be a student - those…

I'm looking at the wiki[2] and 1. it's a documentary 2. it's on Channel 4 -- a public-service (non-commercial) channel in the UK. Can you help add more context for what you're getting at?

The term "documentary" covers a broad range of material. There are in-depth explorations of fact or investigative reporting at one end; and populist fly on the wall fluff at the other end. Benefits Street is definitely on the fluffier end. There was little attempt to explain how benefits work; what the rules are or how they're applied to most people.

The OFCOM investigation is, I think, evidence that the programme was low quality, and focused on sensationalism rather than accuracy. (Although they didn't uphold any of the complaints).

Channel Four is publically owned but is not non-commercial -- it has to mostly fund itself; it carries ads and sells its programmes.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#118

Post by richmarr » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:16 AM UTC

piokoch wrote: post #77

When I see that discussion about basic income I am always wandering, who is going to pay for that? I assume the money will not be printed (this would not help, as inflation would make that income very small). So the country that applies such policy must have some way of finding money. Some countries have natural resources that they can sell, so the problem is solved. But how about the rest? I guess this will be finan…

  When I see that discussion about basic income I am 
  always wandering, who is going to pay for that?

The typical justification is that it pays for itself in simplified management, improved education, lower crime, etc. I haven't seen the sums, but given that the US incarcerates 1% of it's population at exhobitant (direct and indirect) cost, it doesn't seem that unrealistic.

  Let's forget about the question if this is moral or 
  not to take away money from people who are working 
  hard just to give away these money to those, who are 
  not working at all.

We might have forgotten it, but you brought it up and left it hanging like a yeasty fart in a confined space.

Your interpretation of 'moral' here is a narrow one. Socialism is a moral economic solution; it's just not as efficient as well-regulated free markets. In a post-labour-scarcity society this will broadly be moot anyway as much fewer of us will have marketable skills.

Update: I say socialism isn't as efficient as well-regulated free markets. It actually depends on the market. The UK's NHS for example covers the entire population and costs less per capita than the US spends on Medicare (which only manages to cover the elderly). Funding healthcare through insurance creates moral hazard, conflicting incentives, information asymmetry, etc. which adds up to a deeply inefficient market.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#119

Post by Swizec » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:17 AM UTC

mcv wrote: post #99

Swizec wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most civilized countries already have something very similar - social security. Everyone who works pays into the system that distributes that money among those who are unemployed. It's a type of insurance if you will. If I participate in the system, I can be reasonably sure that were I to lose my job, I wouldn't end up on the streets. A spectacular example of why this is a good thing is J.K Rowling who was able to wr…

> I've never understood the exact differences between basic income and social security, The difference is that everybody gets basic income, and not just the unemployed. You don't get a sharp division between the employed and the unemployed, your welfare won't get cut when you start earning money. Work is always rewarded, and it's easier to get out of the poverty trap.

That sounds even better than welfare then!

And for the countries that have already got welfare, the argument of "But nobody is going to work!" is already out the window. If that were a real problem, everybody would already be on welfare.

Yes there are people that abuse it. The vast majority doesn't. Even if it's just because they couldn't look their friends in the eye if they did.

Re: A Dutch city is giving money away to test the basic income theory

#120

Post by ptaipale » Thu, Jul 02, 2015, 9:17 AM UTC

dagw wrote: post #76

wozniacki wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a government were to do that for everyone it seems pretty obvious that society will be better off - people will spend their time working on things to improve everyone's life rather than worrying about how to afford their rent The incredulity of this is plainly galling. How does one draw a broad conclusion like that? Plenty of European examples abound where despite generous - some would argue very generous - state…

The huge 'problem' with most European benefit systems that I am aware of that as soon as you take the money, your time is no longer your own. You cannot go to to school or take courses, start a company, do odd freelance work, do certain types of charity work, travel freely or a whole host of other potentially self improving things, without losing your benefits. Living on benefits is also living in constant fear that…

> 'problem' with most European benefit systems that I am aware of that as soon as you take the money, your time is no longer your own.

Getting a job has similar disadvantages.