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

Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

universiteitleiden.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 786 posts

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#141

Post by kube-system »

pizza234 wrote: post #123
kube-system wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have UBI in the US and many people here would say the same. I think many are quick to conclude motivation is the cause without considering any less visible underlying reasons that cause people to be in those situations.

Could you elaborate on how would one sustain themselves without UBI in the US (according who those here who would say the same)? Things that I typically read: - the lower class struggle even to sustain themselves for days/weeks in between jobs - in the middle class there is people who fear not having health insurance in between jobs How can one survive in US without any job at all? US's welfare is radically different…

The US has many fragmented welfare systems, rather than a single universal system. Many people do live on a combination of these benefit programs. This does not mean they do not struggle.

People who are out of work for short periods of time may not be familiar with all of the various programs and how to sign up for them, and it may take some time to do so. They may also have budgeted their expenses with their employment income in mind. This is why things are particularly difficult for people who intermittently lose their jobs.

But in general, anyone who finds their income unexpectedly unstable or close to the minimum amount necessary to meet their expenses will have a tough time, no matter where that income is coming from, or what value it is.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#142

Post by inglor_cz »

gamerDude wrote: post #106
ozzythecat wrote: post #4

A link to the actual research paper would be helpful. In this experiment, what amount was given to the treatment group that received basic income? How often? How does that amount compare to the cost of living in their city? > ‘It’s sometimes said that people will sit around doing nothing if you give them free money.’ I’m not an academic, so take this with a grain of salt. If my job requires menial labor or involves g…

I also think in general all the research around basic income misses an incredibly important piece that is being proposed in policy changes. Basic income experiments usually game it like this: We will give you x years of payments monthly for just being alive. Then they see what happens. The problem is, policy has one huge difference. It doesn't end. The difference between, I'll give you 2 years of payments monthly and…

"It doesn't end."

To be more precise, it has no specific end date, but in a democracy, it can be repealed again with every new parliament. Or possibly via a ballot initiative.

At which moment the net recipients are in for a major shock.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#143

Post by log4shelled »

orasis wrote: post #22
sschueller wrote: post #8

Just look at the billionaires. They are all still working even after reaching retirement age.

You’re mixing cause and effect. They became billionaires in large part because of their work ethic.

No post body was provided.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#144

Post by _-david-_ »

staticassertion wrote: post #69
ozzythecat wrote: post #4

A link to the actual research paper would be helpful. In this experiment, what amount was given to the treatment group that received basic income? How often? How does that amount compare to the cost of living in their city? > ‘It’s sometimes said that people will sit around doing nothing if you give them free money.’ I’m not an academic, so take this with a grain of salt. If my job requires menial labor or involves g…

> If my job requires menial labor or involves getting berated by customers (many retail jobs), personally I would absolutely not work. Maybe that's a good thing. It's insane how people in service industries are treated - like they're less than human. Shifting some power to them and giving the job a little more of an air of dignity or status would probably help a lot. And the pay would obviously go up. People would be…

>And the pay would obviously go up.

Maybe. Many jobs can be automated, but it was cheaper to just hire minimum wage people to do a job. If the pay required to find people got to be too high, automation would happen more rapidly.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#145

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

jacobn wrote: post #55
pc86 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is exactly what will happen. The pay for those jobs will increase, until such a point where it becomes cheaper/easier to just not have the job in the first place. I don't honestly know why whether or not people will work even factors into one's support for UBI. Some people will keep working, some people won't. Nobody will starve so that seems like something in the "pro" column at least.

Those who work and thereby pay for the UBI may feel that freeriding is actually unjust, and not the hallmark of a glorious new post-scarcity society?

As more jobs become automated, UBI will become a necessity to prevent the collapse of civilization.

Imagine something as simple as burger flipping became completely automated. There would be a million fast food workers suddenly unemployed. Add making espresso to the mix and half a million baristas lose their job.

There won't be a million new jobs created to maintain the automation to pick up the slack.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#146

Post by blamestross »

leifg wrote: post #96

The problem I have with the UBI is that you absolutely have to nail it on the first try in order for it to succeed. A great example is the housing market (in the US but also applies to a lot of European countries). Regardless of UBI there will always be locations that will be more popular than others. I'm not saying everyone wants to live in San Francisco or Manhattan but I don't think supply will always exceed deman…

As long as UBI is never "localized" to regional costs of living it can act to revitalize housing markets in inland America. Housing isn't a gobal supply problem, it's that there isn't enough supply near sources of income. Unlink needing access to work from where you can live and things will get a LOT better.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#148

Post by Dylan16807 »

quotemstr wrote: post #43
onion2k wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meaningless. It's not meaningless. It's not enough to prove that basic income will have a long term positive impact, but it is enough to show further experimentation on a larger, more long term scale is worthwhile. It's decidedly unreasonable, not to mention unscientific, to dismiss something because you don't like it.

We've done that experiment. The results are self-evident. This isn't suggestive, valid science. It's the equivalent of setting up a "scientific" contraption that purports to be a perpetual motion machine. You can create a pretty convincing fake perpetual motion machine, but because we have a broader theory of mechanics, we know perpetual motion is impossible, that the purported machine must be cheating somehow (even…

We've done a long-term wide-scale UBI experiment? Where?

I hope you don't mean any fickle systems tied to covid, and I especially hope you don't mean the unemployment boost the US did; unemployment pay is very different from basic income.

And even if something fails, that doesn't prove it's some kind of impossibility like perpetual motion machines.

Re: Basic income would not reduce people’s willingness to work

#150

Post by respondo2134 »

pc86 wrote: post #75
jacobn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who work and thereby pay for the UBI may feel that freeriding is actually unjust, and not the hallmark of a glorious new post-scarcity society?

I'm sure some will. Some won't. So what? I'm not trying to be dismissive, but this strikes me as a "but some people will be upset!" argument, which seems irrelevant to whether the policy achieves its stated goals or not.

then why are so many UBI proponents surprised when those who would bankroll this experiement fight it so hard?
Post reply on HN