A universal income is not such a silly idea • Hacker News Board

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#121

Post by LekkoscPiwa » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:36 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #116

LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #74

I'm always shocked how otherwise very rational and logical people tend to be "communists". It is one of the things that lets me down when reading comments on HN. So sophisticated as far as hard science goes, so naive and just - plain dumb - in terms of humanities. Ever heard of inflation? If you give basic income to everyone what happens to the prices of everything? So the ROI on this is extremely limited and the pri…

I'm always shocked how otherwise very rational and logical people tend think every socialist idea is communist and don't seem to know what communist actually means. > Ever heard of inflation? Yes, have you? > If you give basic income to everyone what happens to the prices of everything? I don't think you know how inflation works. Basic income doesn't increase the money supply, it's income redistribution, not money pr…

money printing is inflation.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#122

Post by bausson » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:37 PM UTC

netcan wrote: post #11

Rather than these posts discussing universal basic income in abstract, I would like to see someone go through a back of the envelope scenario for a real country that might try it. Switzerland or some other European country. Presumably there would need to be major changes to income tax brackets (especially for the lower income tiers) & dismantling of various existing welfare programs in order to fund a basic income. I…

Universal income experiment in India, which I think we can mark as 'successful'.

http://mondediplo.com/2013/05/04income

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#123

Post by informatimago » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:37 PM UTC

cynusx wrote: post #90

JTon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would hate to be the person who earns just over that arbitrary 100k line.

hiring managers would use it to convince people to take sub-100k wages. This pretty much happens already in progressive taxation countries(e.g. belgium) where you can actually make less money by having a higher salary because your tax-rate increases.

That's why taxes must be proportional too. The state spends X euro, the productive economy pays Y euro of salaries+dividends, therefore everybody pays incomeX/Y of taxes. X/Y is the income tax rate.

Or if you prefer to tax sales, with Z being the total amount of sales, priceX/Z. X/Z is the VAT rate.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#124

Post by downandout » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:38 PM UTC

rycho wrote: post #119

downandout wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not separating anything. I am saying that inflation will rise, because that's what happens when a country isn't producing anything more, but the country increases the amount of its currency in circulation. It's like a stock split - absent a rise in the actual value of the company, doubling the number of shares makes each share half as valuable. In this case, over time inflation will adjust to the point that the…

basic income doesn't increase the amount of currency in circulation...

How do you propose they get this money to give to people then?

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#125

Post by mistermann » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:39 PM UTC

ewzimm wrote: post #66

ck2 wrote: post #12

It's not a silly idea at all but I like to think of myself as progressive and I think it is a very bad idea in reality vs on paper. Just look at how college costs magically rise to the availability of loans and grants. What do you think is going to happen to food and rent prices once those supply chains figure out there is much more profit to be made? The Walton family alone has more wealth then the lower 42% rest of…

It's already worse than that. There are many products which have a smaller size of that's more expensive than the larger size because the smaller one is WIC-approved. There's targeted price-gouging for people who are forced by the government to buy specific products. There are also ridiculous loopholes. People buy soda and milk with returnable bottles, walk outside, pour it out, return the bottles for cash, and buy a…

> People buy soda and milk with returnable bottles, walk outside, pour it out, return the bottles for cash, and buy a beer. This happens consistently at grocery stores.

This is a perfect example of how all people do not in fact act in a responsible manner as many people would have us believe when discussing topics such as this. Some people simply are unwilling or unable to even semi-wisely manage the life of a human being, which shouldn't be that shameful really considering how complex of a job it is nowadays.

In many cases, some people really do know what is better for certain others.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#126

Post by rycho » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:39 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #124

rycho wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

basic income doesn't increase the amount of currency in circulation...

How do you propose they get this money to give to people then?

Taxes? I'm not proposing anything by the way, just explaining that mincome isn't a proposal to print a bunch of new money. I think the idea is that it replaces current welfare programs.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#127

Post by downandout » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:40 PM UTC

rycho wrote: post #126

downandout wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose they get this money to give to people then?

Taxes? I'm not proposing anything by the way, just explaining that mincome isn't a proposal to print a bunch of new money. I think the idea is that it replaces current welfare programs.

Whom would you tax? It isn't possible that taxes would cover all of it.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#128

Post by jonknee » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:40 PM UTC

Mikeb85 wrote: post #78

PaulJoslin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's correct Mike, it's not always the case (benefits being cut and working a job can provide you with a worse quality of life) - but I think that is more of a problem regarding the wages people are being paid in jobs, rather than the benefits system. For a long time inflation, house prices and general costs have beat basic wage increases - leaving many working for less money relatively than they would've got years…

> The system is broken, but the equality of pay and living standards is not to blame with the government, it's to blame with greedy corporations, share holders insisting they need to do anything for profit and wages being pinned down to the minimum they can be that the work force will stand for (to maximise profits). Let me ask you something... If you start a new business, and let's say you take out a huge loan to pa…

> Corporations pay market value for wages, to increase wages you need to either increase the number of jobs, or decrease the number of workers.

To a large degree the market value for wages is such only because of a government subsidy to the employers. Take Wal-Mart for example, they go as far as helping their employees enroll in all sorts of government poverty programs because even though they are full-time workers they still qualify for SNAP (food stamps), Medicaid and other similar programs.

Wal-Mart, McDonalds and other similar large low-wage paying corporations should not be able to use government welfare in what effectively part of their compensation to employees.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#129

Post by nawitus » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:43 PM UTC

cynusx wrote: post #90

JTon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would hate to be the person who earns just over that arbitrary 100k line.

hiring managers would use it to convince people to take sub-100k wages. This pretty much happens already in progressive taxation countries(e.g. belgium) where you can actually make less money by having a higher salary because your tax-rate increases.

>This pretty much happens already in progressive taxation countries(e.g. belgium) where you can actually make less money by having a higher salary because your tax-rate increases.

All sane countries with progressive taxation always apply the higher tax bracket only to the part of the salary that is in the bracket.

E.g. if the tax is 10% = $50k, a $60k salary would have to pay 10% * $50k + 25% * $10k in taxes, and all wage increases increase net pay.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#130

Post by michaeldhopkins » Thu, Nov 28, 2013, 3:43 PM UTC

In order for a basic income program to save costs on bureaucracy and replace existing programs, those existing programs must be closed by legislation or executive order, and the people employed by them must lose their jobs, and the number of employees in the new basic income agency must be fewer. Many of these employees will not find replacement work due to age or their industry (government bureaucracy) shrinking so will go from middle class to poor on basic income.

This will have a large economic effect unless it is done slowly, but if it is done slowly, both programs will have to exist at once without paying too much to the same person. This will require the basic income agency to have the same kind of bureaucracy as the other agencies or else have no oversight. In the first phase of the transition, at least, it would cost much more.

The agency would need to maintain some bureaucracy to guard against fraud since obtaining benefits would never require a visit to an office or proof of some activity. It would be easy for someone to claim extra people without oversight.