Live data from Hacker News

UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

greshm.org

21–30 of 141 posts

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#21
post #13

It seems people forget the most obvious thing: A government powerful enough to give everybody a salary is powerful enough to REMOVE everybody's salary. It is also a monopoly of power. That already happened: In communist Russia if you were not a good communist (you believed communism was a crap system) it meant no salary for you, a shitty status or being sent to prison or forced labor. If your children, or any family…

> UBI means taxes need to be confiscatory for those that work

Can you explain what you mean by "confiscatory" and how it differs from normal income tax?

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#22
post #14
post #5

Doesn't UBI equate to lowering the prices for everything? Isn't it more feasible to pursue the latter?

We want to guarantee for every human on the planet the right to food, water, shelter, health care, and education. Giving everyone enough money to buy all those things themselves is one way to do it. Raising funds (taxes) and then providing those services for free is another way. It doesn’t really matter which way. What matters is that we agree on that goal and find some way to achieve it. Right now we have a system w…

We want to guarantee for every human on the planet the right to food, water, shelter, health care, and education. ... What matters is that we agree on that goal and find some way to achieve it.

Honestly, I don't. First, perhaps it's small minded but I don't really feel responsible for every human on the planet, or even a significant percentage.

Second, the value, even to the end recipient, of vast majority of education and healthcare is dubious at best. Similarly to the study on which OP is commenting, there was a famous Oregon Medicaid health experiment and the benefits of healthcare services expansion were minimal. Same for education with various headstart initiatives.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#23
post #19
post #7

The world is increasingly complex making it seem to many people that their work is unproductive (bullshit/make-work jobs). This and lack of agency in many jobs is what leads to massive frustration with work* but it's not actually an incisive observation about the economy as a whole. it’s not possible to pilot a UBI. Giving cash to a small subset of the population is not UBI. UBI goes to everyone. It changes the econo…

There are things that work and couldn’t be piloted - Postal System for example.

How so? The first postal systems certainly didn't cover entire kingdoms and didn't serve the entire population.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#24
post #19
post #7

The world is increasingly complex making it seem to many people that their work is unproductive (bullshit/make-work jobs). This and lack of agency in many jobs is what leads to massive frustration with work* but it's not actually an incisive observation about the economy as a whole. it’s not possible to pilot a UBI. Giving cash to a small subset of the population is not UBI. UBI goes to everyone. It changes the econo…

There are things that work and couldn’t be piloted - Postal System for example.

Couriers have existed since the beginning of civilization. With many famous examples, like Pheidippides in keeping with the Olympic spirit.

It was obviously valuable and workable from the smallest scale possible: a verbal message carried by a runner.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#25
post #5

Doesn't UBI equate to lowering the prices for everything? Isn't it more feasible to pursue the latter?

UBI equates to an assumption that the government can predict and control markets completely, effectively destroying markets that resemble anything like a free market. Even considering an alternative to UBI like forcing all prices lower, i.e. price deflation, requires first taking that assumption as true. The government never could allow prices to lower anyway though. Price deflation would make our national debt that…

It’s the opposite. Currently governments subsidize housing, food, internet access, etc for the poor through various programs. There’s no free market interaction when government bureaucrats are deciding where to build affordable housing etc.

UBI toss those programs away saying hand people money and let the free market allocate resources. Hypothetically you hand money to everyone, but as far as the middle class is concerned there is zero difference to lower tax brackets for the first 10,000$/year of income vs 1 tax bracket + a lump sum. So estimates of how expensive UBI would be really come down to how many subsidies you remove.

Further if you believe in free markets then UBI should actually be cheaper for the same social benefit.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#26
post #18
post #13

It seems people forget the most obvious thing: A government powerful enough to give everybody a salary is powerful enough to REMOVE everybody's salary. It is also a monopoly of power. That already happened: In communist Russia if you were not a good communist (you believed communism was a crap system) it meant no salary for you, a shitty status or being sent to prison or forced labor. If your children, or any family…

When you take away the government's monopoly on power you get what subsequently happened in Russia, a handful of oligarchs who have all the power instead.

Power != force, and Western governments certainly don't have a monopoly on power.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#27

The author seems to effectively argue for UBI as a solution to bullshit jobs. People waste a lot of time today in jobs that produce no real value, instead the government should pay people a similar wage to not do those jobs. > There is no such thing as a UBI trial. There is no such thing as a UBI pilot program. Instead, there are cash transfer experiments being branded as UBI. More strange to me, the author includes…

Don't we already have Marxism-Socialism though? It been called many things from social safety net to welfare. You can look at Social Security and its money woes as an example. That system is going insolvent with people contributing. It is mandatory to contribute if you are gainfully employed..

Programs that truly are needs based don't really fit into the Marxist approach. UBI is much closer to, or just is, Marxism because its universal. You get the money simply because the government decided that is the amount of money everyone needs and deserves.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#28
From the post...

> the key insight that the Noah Smiths of the world seem to be missing is that, in today’s world, we artificially elevate labor demand to keep people employed.

To me one learning of COVID and lockdowns is that we're fully capable of meeting all our basic needs with less than 20% of the workforce (which sadly tends also tends to be the lowest paid). In short we don't need everyone to be working for food, shelter, healthcare etc.

Unfortunately, if we take the climate as an example for how we handle a complex and challenging topic like this, we're going to completely fumble UBI and the role work plays in our future culture and society.

It's an incredibly complex problem, simply considering individual vs. national perspectives. And our collective response to the topic is far too reactive and prejudiced to even begin studying it in a sensible way.

We live in a world where businesses have already realised incredible value from the Linux operating system, which was begun by a student living in his mums house, being subsidised by Finnish social security. He then went on to create git, leading to GitHub, which now manages the code for 90% of Fortune 100 companies.

The opportunity is clear but I can't see us being able to untangle this effectively.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#29
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI equates to an assumption that the government can predict and control markets completely, effectively destroying markets that resemble anything like a free market. Even considering an alternative to UBI like forcing all prices lower, i.e. price deflation, requires first taking that assumption as true. The government never could allow prices to lower anyway though. Price deflation would make our national debt that…

It’s the opposite. Currently governments subsidize housing, food, internet access, etc for the poor through various programs. There’s no free market interaction when government bureaucrats are deciding where to build affordable housing etc. UBI toss those programs away saying hand people money and let the free market allocate resources. Hypothetically you hand money to everyone, but as far as the middle class is conc…

If you don't like how the government subsidized certain markets today, I'm not quite sure why a good solution would be to subsidize the entire economy.

Such a program is way too complex to model out and reliably predict what the impact will be. We simply don't know how much UBI is the "right" amount for specific outcomes, and we definitely don't know what the impact will be on any subset of the economy.

According to the OP author, we can't even test UBI programs before a full rollout. If we can't reliably model or predict the outcome, and we can test it, how are we supposed to actually implement it?

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#30
post #24
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are things that work and couldn’t be piloted - Postal System for example.

Couriers have existed since the beginning of civilization. With many famous examples, like Pheidippides in keeping with the Olympic spirit. It was obviously valuable and workable from the smallest scale possible: a verbal message carried by a runner.

But the network effect of mass messaging —- is what the article means by unpilotable.
Post reply on HN