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

A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

bloombergview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 840 posts

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#141

Post by panic »

empressplay wrote: post #60
panic wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minimum-wage jobs would by necessity then need to pay more That's the opposite of what's being proposed: the minimum income comes from the government, not employers. Minimum income can replace minimum wage. For example, say I'm a landlord. If everyone all of a sudden had an additional "base" income, why wouldn't I increase my rents to absorb at least a portion of that? Then, only people who had a job would still be a…

This would only work in places where supply exceeded demand. In a landlords' market there is no reason to compete. All the same people who could afford to rent from you before can still afford to rent from you now, you're just charging them more.

Imagine two cities, Fortyville and Hundredsixton. In Fortyville, people make an average of $40,000 a year, while in Hundredsixton, the mean annual income is $160,000.

Would you expect the average rent for a room in Hundredsixton to be $10,000/month higher than the average rent in Fortyville? That isn't what happens in practice; rent doesn't go up one-to-one with income.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#142

Post by mcv »

lackingcaffeine wrote: post #128

I think the idea of a basic income is really interesting though one aspect of it troubles me and I would be interested to hear HN's solutions to it. The trouble lies in the creative and economic relationship. If a substantial number of people reduce or stop their usual working hours and live off the income to pursue entirely creative activities, such as making a website or art, they are exempt from the usual capitali…

I think most people will continue to work, simply because people generally like having more money. What will stop is degrading bullshit jobs for little pay. Businesses that rely on those jobs will disappear, unless they manage to make their jobs more attractive. Businesses will have to work harder to attract employees, because employees are less desperate for work. More of the profit will go to employees, less to upper management and shareholders. I think that's a good thing.

Unless those jobs can be automated completely, of course. But then, GDP is fine, taxes will probably focus more on corporations, and people will be freed from the degrading bullshit jobs, free to look for something better. And that, I think, is also a good thing. Let the robots do the stupid work, while we're off doing more fun stuff.

Make sure technology makes everybody's lives better. Isn't that the entire point?

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#143

Post by xioxox »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #63
mseebach wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem with the UBI debate is that few people explicitly name the amounts they imagine. You seem to imply a level near the minimum wage, but that's flat out impossible. The total US tax revenue is around $20k/year/person, so a realistic UBI is upper bounded at perhaps $2-300/month (full time at $15 is about $2,600/month) - and at 20% of total revenue, that would have to replace substantial portions of ex…

I envision it as enough for someone to get by. So not enough for luxury expenditures. Basically food and shelter. I'm also looking at this from the perspective of someone in the UK who doesn't have to think of things like health care and education which changes things quite a bit. I'd say around $800 p/m per person would be plenty if you look at food and rent for a room in a shared apartment. Tax revenue should also…

You'd still need some people to work on running welfare programmes. Not every basic need can be met by a fixed sum for everyone. For example, some disabled people need extra money to run a car, get equipment in their homes or perhaps employ a carer (if this wasn't otherwise supplied).

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#144

Post by ido »

mcv wrote: post #130

Interesting how this article spins Basic Income as something of particular interest to conservatives while liberals would object to it. I suppose that can help sell the concept to highly partisan anti-liberals, but I know plenty of liberals and progressives who strongly support Basic Income. The idea that the people employed in the bureaucracy managing the current mess of programs losing their job is a silly concern.…

The sum also depends on how much robots will make stuff cheaper. Remember buying clothes and appliances/electronics before the 90s?

These used to be major expenses, and much more expensive than today, adjusted to inflation (stuff got cheaper partially due to globalisation & partially greater automation).

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#145

Post by mcv »

weddpros wrote: post #116
arximboldi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if that would actually be the case, but if it were, the question would be: is it actually a bad thing? I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste [1]. In fact, it is normal that as our society gets more educated and the supply of unskilled workers goes down, a lot of hard manual labor will become expensive. This is already the case with mining,…

"I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste" That's because moral justification isn't at the center of our society. The market is. Many attempts have been made to switch from the market to something else, not many were brilliant. The "lucky historical accident" you cite isn't one... It's just the way our society was built. Also you could argue on many differ…

The labour market is not going away with BI. It will just become more free. Currently, many workers are forced to accept crappy jobs for little pay because the alternative is starvation. With BI, they can afford to say no when they don't think the compensation is worth it. If those crappy jobs are necessary, they will have to improve, either by making the jobs more fun or interesting, or increasing the pay.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#146

Post by yummyfajitas »

gjm11 wrote: post #99

This article says it's talking about a universal basic income, and makes the usual point that a completely universal, no-strings-attached income is simple to administer, doesn't have poverty traps, etc. And then, towards the end where it starts looking at numbers, it starts saying things like > But by excluding 45 million retirees who already receive a basic income through Social Security, the cost falls to $2.7 tril…

It's not just wealthier people who will be worse off - it's everyone.

Basic income is known to create a large disincentive for work. In previous experiments (Mincome) labor supply dropped by about 10% - double what happened during the great recession.

This means that fewer working mothers can find child care, fewer laborers to mow your lawn, fewer nurses, fewer teachers, etc. No matter how much money you give to people, fewer services provided makes us all become poorer. That's simple arithmetic.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#147

Post by lackingcaffeine »

rorykoehler wrote: post #137
lackingcaffeine wrote: post #128

I think the idea of a basic income is really interesting though one aspect of it troubles me and I would be interested to hear HN's solutions to it. The trouble lies in the creative and economic relationship. If a substantial number of people reduce or stop their usual working hours and live off the income to pursue entirely creative activities, such as making a website or art, they are exempt from the usual capitali…

>This could mean a substantial number of people are neither creating wealth through work or taxable business. How is this any different than what we have currently? It could be argued that many employed persons are currently destroying wealth through unethical practices encouraged by profit/rent seeking that is prevalent in contemporary economy. A basic income as you have noted will also allow for people to open 'goo…

I don't agree that anything close to a majority a people are working unethically or for unethical ends. Most people are doing jobs that have some economic and societal function. This system works so well because if the product you are offering isn't needed by society then it can't exist. I'm just wondering what the consequences of this subversion will be. If everybody opens a "good business" that doesn't make a profit or is needed, the services we do need will be compromised and the money we take to build schools and hospitals will be reduced.

The ethical net gain might be good, and society's impression of jobs may be altered but that doesn't answer the economic problem of how to encourage people to work in fields that are fiscally meaningful

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#148

Post by panic »

weddpros wrote: post #116
arximboldi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if that would actually be the case, but if it were, the question would be: is it actually a bad thing? I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste [1]. In fact, it is normal that as our society gets more educated and the supply of unskilled workers goes down, a lot of hard manual labor will become expensive. This is already the case with mining,…

"I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste" That's because moral justification isn't at the center of our society. The market is. Many attempts have been made to switch from the market to something else, not many were brilliant. The "lucky historical accident" you cite isn't one... It's just the way our society was built. Also you could argue on many differ…

That's because moral justification isn't at the center of our society. The market is.

So how much do you pay your friends to hang out with you? I've been going with $20 a visit, but I've heard that might be a little on the low side these days.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#149

Post by [deleted] »

rorykoehler wrote: post #137
lackingcaffeine wrote: post #128

I think the idea of a basic income is really interesting though one aspect of it troubles me and I would be interested to hear HN's solutions to it. The trouble lies in the creative and economic relationship. If a substantial number of people reduce or stop their usual working hours and live off the income to pursue entirely creative activities, such as making a website or art, they are exempt from the usual capitali…

>This could mean a substantial number of people are neither creating wealth through work or taxable business. How is this any different than what we have currently? It could be argued that many employed persons are currently destroying wealth through unethical practices encouraged by profit/rent seeking that is prevalent in contemporary economy. A basic income as you have noted will also allow for people to open 'goo…

[deleted]

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#150

Post by mrottenkolber »

weddpros wrote: post #116
arximboldi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if that would actually be the case, but if it were, the question would be: is it actually a bad thing? I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste [1]. In fact, it is normal that as our society gets more educated and the supply of unskilled workers goes down, a lot of hard manual labor will become expensive. This is already the case with mining,…

"I don't see any moral justification for a software engineer earning more than someone collecting waste" That's because moral justification isn't at the center of our society. The market is. Many attempts have been made to switch from the market to something else, not many were brilliant. The "lucky historical accident" you cite isn't one... It's just the way our society was built. Also you could argue on many differ…

Who or what is your society? Moral justification is absolutely at the center of European society. Sure, we have lots of criminal capitalists here as well, but morals is our way to deal with those people.

You seem to suggest letting these American-style gangsters go unchecked. Why though?

You also seem to be suggesting that studying until 23 is less enjoyable than working 9-17 from 17/18 onwards.

This all leads me to think you have a very upper-class, down-upon, shielded from trouble perspective.

Post reply on HN