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

I'm going to work full-time on free software

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 292 posts

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#121

Post by blfr »

coldtea wrote: post #109
blfr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's the modern version of a minor landed gentleman who can pursue his interests. It's how we got science. Sadly, the best argument against UBI is that vast, vast majority of people will not be working full time on F/OSS or quite possible anything else.

> Sadly, the best argument against UBI is that vast, vast majority of people will not be working full time on F/OSS or quite possible anything else. That's sad only if we have the scarcity induced morality of associating "getting to have a living" with "earning it by working".

No, it's sad in the same sense gigahours wasted in front of TVs are sad.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#122

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

jai_ wrote: post #118

Will you be planning to contribute on the osu!lazer project again?

I still pull it down every now and again, but probably not going to contribute in any meaningful way. Once it's closer to being complete I'll probably go in and do a big Linux support patch.

Odds are good for TrueCraft, though!

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#124

Post by astazangasta »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #100
jecxjo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not about disincentivizing them, its about not providing them with applicable skills that would make their production worth more than basic hand outs. It can be demoralizing when you realize that flipping burger is worth $100 a week more than doing absolutely nothing, but we don't live in a world where a burger is worth $40 that would allow them to be paid more. Younger people tend to not have a real concept of m…

Maybe. In a world of increasing automation (explosive in the last 15 years) there's not much value in training for anything less than medicine or engineering. And US has 30 million flipping burgers. When that's automated too, there's not many that could retrain to be engineers. And we don't need 30M more engineers anyway. That's why UBI is a hot topic. Its a way out of a collapse.

Automation has not been explosive in the last 15 years, I'm not sure why you think this. Productivity growth (the measure of increasing automation) has been the lowest its been in decades, see here: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user330...

As for whether we need 30 million engineers, thats entirely up to what we want to be as a society. If you don't think we can come up with engineering work for 30 million people I beg to differ.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#125

Post by conanbatt »

peatmoss wrote: post #12

My best argument for UBI is, “I’d love to be able to work on F/OSS full time.” Kudos for making it a reality. It may be scratching a personal itch, but the positive externalities to society are real.

Thats not an argument in favor of UBI, its an affirmation of what you would do if you got free money.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#126

Post by mazlix »

wj wrote: post #115
coldtea wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI shouldn't be connected with "making a living in NYC" or whether. It should be enough to cover basic needs, even if it means having to move to a cheaper state. In that light, something like $10-$12,000 is more like it -- should cover rent, basic food, electricity, and so on. It's to not have homeless, destitute, left behind people, not to cover nice living expenses. For a family, $10 will be of course $20, and so…

Moving is expensive as well. When you hear about families being unable to buy diapers in bulk because they can't save the $50 needed for that and instead buy smaller quantities at twice the cost per diaper you realize that some people simply can't afford to move somewhere cheaper as crazy as that sounds.

Yeah but with UBI everyone would suddenly have a great source of credit. Who wouldn't loan someone $10k to move at a low interest rate when you know that person by being a US Citizen is receiving $10k/yr.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#127

Post by hyperpape »

skrowl wrote: post #23
robert_foss wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if moving is an option for you. But there are plenty of countries that offer free healthcare. Sweden, UK, Norway... the list goes on.

About that "free" healthcare in Sweden, etc... If you make $60,000 here in the USA, you can expect to pay about 22% in taxes ( https://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx ) so ~$12,600. You move to Sweden and make that same $60K USD equivalent. Their tax rate is 61.85 percent ( https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/personal-income-tax-rate ) so ~$37,110. I bet you can stay here and buy some pretty great he…

Sweden absolutely has higher taxes on the middle and lower classes than the United States in order to fund its safety net (one old source: https://lanekenworthy.net/2008/02/10/taxes-and-inequality-le...). You are correct about that.

However, you are just presenting numbers in misleading ways that do not accurately reflect the actual taxes paid. Please stop.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#128

Post by alligatorstraw »

atom_arranger wrote: post #66
skrowl wrote: post #18

Here's my best argument for why UBI can't work in the USA. Let me know where i went wrong: My TV told me a "living wage" is at least $15 (but probably higher in liberal controlled areas like NYC / most CA cities / etc due to high cost of living & taxation), but we'll start with $15 to make it easy. $15/hr at 40hr/week = $31,200 per year. $31,200 * 328,300,000 population of USA = $10,242,960,000,000 Written out (for e…

We could print more money. The inflation will hit people who have a lot of money saved up more than it will hit the people getting UBI. I'm not sure it's the right option, but it's something to consider. If you have someone below the poverty line and you tell them "I'll give you 30k, but due to inflation each dollar will only be able to buy half of what it can now." I think they'll take that deal.

I never quite understood why many central banks expand the money supply by purchasing financial assets instead of just handing out money to everyone.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#129

Post by astazangasta »

mrfredward wrote: post #86
atom_arranger wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could print more money. The inflation will hit people who have a lot of money saved up more than it will hit the people getting UBI. I'm not sure it's the right option, but it's something to consider. If you have someone below the poverty line and you tell them "I'll give you 30k, but due to inflation each dollar will only be able to buy half of what it can now." I think they'll take that deal.

Tax the rich to provide a safety net = Europe Print money to fund government programs = Venezuela Historically, was there ever a time that hyperinflation didn't end badly?

There are plenty of times where printing money didn't produce hyperinflation. For example, the US pursued a policy called quantitative easing over the last decade which involved dumping trillions of dollars into the coffers of banks; inflation is still sluggish. This is because there are four terms in the equation of exchange: MV=PQ. If you increase M (money), P (price) will only go up if V (the velocity of money) and Q (demand) remain constant. In the US, V was very low and there was a lot of slack in our productive capacity (mostly because construction had overbuilt during the bubble years). The result was no hyperinflation or inflation of any kind.

Re: I'm going to work full-time on free software

#130

Post by dllthomas »

nostrebored wrote: post #111
bryanlarsen wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you expect inflation to occur? As long as UBI is payed for via taxes and not deficit spending than the money supply isn't changing. And as economists say, inflation is a monetary phenomenon. Supply & demand aren't radically changing either. America's poor eat too much, not too little. And while there are homeless people in America, most sleep in shelters. If anything, you might expect the price of the cheap…

Money supply isn't the issue here. If everyone has another x+12,000 dollars, the amount of money available for low income housing has strictly increased. Landlords are then in a position to raise prices proportionally. The "America's poor eat too much" line is also not strong. You might argue that they eat the wrong things; this is the food desert/education argument that's commonly made. Regardless there is already a…

> If everyone has another x+12,000 dollars, the amount of money available for low income housing has strictly increased. Landlords are then in a position to raise prices proportionally.

Not really.

First, if landlords go to charge more they are increasing the attractiveness of using housing more efficiently. If everyone is getting an extra $1k/mo and landlords are charging an extra $1k/mo, then I'm saving an extra $500/mo when a friend and I decide to room together. For some people this will make the difference in their decision making, and this will increase the number of available units and put downward pressure on prices. From this dynamic alone, we should still expect prices to rise, but less (and likely much less) than the full amount.

Second, we're not really constrained on "supply of housing" at a national scale. We're constrained on supply of "housing where someone wants to live". "Where someone wants to live" comprises a lot of factors, many differing by the individual, but "sufficiently close to ability to make sufficient income" is usually a big part of it. A UBI directly increases our supply of "housing sufficiently close to ability to make sufficient income" which would now be competing against existing stock.

Post reply on HN