It Is Time For Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#171

Post by gkoz » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:21 AM UTC

brenschluss wrote: post #102

gkoz wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you assume people would be spending their BI rationally? Spending everything on gambling and drugs would still be possible, having more than the least possible income by shady means would still appeal to some. It seems to me reasons for crime wouldn't be exactly destroyed.

If BI was disbursed bi-weekly, then "Spending everything" wouldn't be a catastrophic failure. It's not like you'd be sitting on a pot of gold. What if BI was disbursed daily, even? You would never amass enough money to "spend everything" on gambling on drugs...

I can't decide, whether to consider this a nanny or police state...

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#172

Post by pat2man » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:21 AM UTC

fishtoaster wrote: post #163

I haven't read much on BI, so I'm sure this has already been answered already, but: how do the numbers add up? The US poverty line for a single person is $11k. For simplicity, let's say BI gives everyone in the US $10k per year. Times 313.9 million, that's $3.1 trillion per year. The US government spent, overall, $3.45 trillion in 2013. How would we be able to afford basic income?

Same way we pay for anything else, cutting spending and increasing taxes.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#173

Post by whyme » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:21 AM UTC

fishtoaster wrote: post #163

I haven't read much on BI, so I'm sure this has already been answered already, but: how do the numbers add up? The US poverty line for a single person is $11k. For simplicity, let's say BI gives everyone in the US $10k per year. Times 313.9 million, that's $3.1 trillion per year. The US government spent, overall, $3.45 trillion in 2013. How would we be able to afford basic income?

I'm not sure you could to do straight math like that as it does depend on the implementation. I presume there would be corporate tax laws introduced that would re-coupe most dollars associated with employees. So a govt could craft whatever policies they want in order to make it work out.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#174

Post by buzaga41 » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:21 AM UTC

ahomescu1 wrote: post #149

rjtavares wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current mess is not only poorly implemented, it's based on false assumptions. We just need to stop pretending there's something wrong with people not being able to find a decent job, and stop punishing them.

You should also look at it from the other side: if I have a job that I work at 8-10 hours a day (and might not do if I didn't need the money), how am I "punishing" the other guy by not sharing the fruits of my labor with him for nothing in return? EDIT: To put it another way: if I'm a productive worker and have a job, I am "rewarded" by working for a boss (taking orders from him/her), and having to turn over 35-50% o…

you are not, but society is an organism with more than you in it, and if he's thrown into the bin because he's can't make it in it the guy may think it's fair to take it from you...

in the same vein, your job only exist because there's people with enough buying power to keep the business you're at existing, so again you depend on people, and you could be punished or rewarded depending on how society as a entire organism does...

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#175

Post by jiggy2011 » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:22 AM UTC

kalvin wrote: post #164

I think if you could see close-up how these systems work now, you'd be convinced that it's completely not worth the cost in practice to try and figure out who "deserves" each of the many, many special benefits/allowances/exemptions available (plus it's incredibly difficult for potential recipients to figure out what they're eligible for, plus it imposes those costs on the people who aren't eligible, but end up having…

I'm not convinced that Basic income would necessarily deal with edge cases all that much better. A simple basic income implies that you provide everybody with the same minimum income and they cut back on public services etc to the minimum since in theory people can now buy what they want.

But there are problems in that not everyone can live off the same amount of money. This is especially true with disabled or very ill people who are the most likely to be unable to obtain employment. They also require more money to maintain the same living standard, often much more in the case of people who require full time care etc.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#176

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:22 AM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #24

robobenjie wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It replaces minimum wage in that McDonalds is welcome to offer a job flipping burgers for $1 an hour if they want. However, because no one _needs_ a job to live (because they can just live on the basic income) someone would only take that job if it was worth it/fulfilling to them.

How does this all interact with debt? Can I get a lump sum payment in return for my future wage? Can it be taken away to pay creditors, child support, back taxes, etc. ?

> How does this all interact with debt?

Other than "you can use it to pay debt", not at all.

> Can I get a lump sum payment in return for my future wage?

If you mean "will someone loan me money in return for me pledging an amount equal to my future basic income for some period", maybe, but it would be a really bad idea to let it be redirected.

> Can it be taken away to pay creditors, child support, back taxes, etc. ?

Probably not -- there is already, AIUI, a "first $X" (which may vary under specific local rules depending on context) of income which is protected against garnishments, etc., and BI probably ought to fall within that (at least until the economy advances enough to support a more than pedestrian lifestyle on BI alone, at which point it might only be part of the BI that is within that protection.)

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#177

Post by gizmo686 » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:22 AM UTC

fishtoaster wrote: post #163

I haven't read much on BI, so I'm sure this has already been answered already, but: how do the numbers add up? The US poverty line for a single person is $11k. For simplicity, let's say BI gives everyone in the US $10k per year. Times 313.9 million, that's $3.1 trillion per year. The US government spent, overall, $3.45 trillion in 2013. How would we be able to afford basic income?

I can think of three sane approaches. First, BI does not necessarily need to be above the poverty line. We can also go to a progressive BI, which may better be describe as a negative income tax, where the poor get more than the rich. And we can increase taxes.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#178

Post by hueving » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:24 AM UTC

mekael wrote: post #139

atom-morgan wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...that eliminates money all together You can't eliminate money. It's a natural creation of human interaction. Even prisoners have money.

If we can create , then we can destroy just as easily.

Idiotic equivalence. There are very few processes that can be reversed just as easily.

Radiation, waste heat, carbon dioxide - the list goes on and on.

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#179

Post by RoboTeddy » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:24 AM UTC

fishtoaster wrote: post #163

I haven't read much on BI, so I'm sure this has already been answered already, but: how do the numbers add up? The US poverty line for a single person is $11k. For simplicity, let's say BI gives everyone in the US $10k per year. Times 313.9 million, that's $3.1 trillion per year. The US government spent, overall, $3.45 trillion in 2013. How would we be able to afford basic income?

I don't know much about BI or the numbers either, but I'm guessing that BI would replace some existing spending.

Social security, unemployment, food stamps, etc seem to account for 1/3rd of the total federal budget in 2013 [1].

[1] http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budge...

Re: It Is Time For Basic Income

#180

Post by FD3SA » Sat, Mar 22, 2014, 1:24 AM UTC

Basic income is the first step to an empirically ethical society, which accounts for inherent human limitations and behaviors. Evolution is an extremely feckless game, and thus far we've been trapped by its whims, endlessly struggling in a free-for-all battle for survival.

In order to transcend and escape our evolutionary origins, we will first and foremost need to understand ourselves. How we came to be, what behaviors we're prone to, and what impact these have on our societies.

Second, we will need technology which allows us to liberate ourselves from extreme labor, giving us free time to engage our societies in a calm, rational matter without our survival on the line.

If these two conditions are met, then I believe humanity will transcend into a new golden age. As of this writing, I think we're made incredible progress on the second point, but are very far behind on the first.

Furthermore, the US is an extremely complex nation, with a history that makes unity almost impossible except against foreign entities. The US needs to make an incredible amount of progress on the first point in order to even consider radical ideas like basic income. In fact, it is currently dialing back its SNAP (food stamps), which is part of its social assistance program. This is in the context of an already weak social safety net, by far the weakest of any western nation.

Sadly, the US has a very long way to go. The commonwealth and Nordic countries, by comparison, are much further along.