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

The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

spectacle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 389 posts

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#221

Post by pault »

Suncho wrote: post #126
rev_bird wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you try to do this using conventional budget math, you're not going to get the right answer. I'm very curious about this part, particularly in light of your comment elsewhere that "It's possible to implement basic income without any direct government support." I feel like there are very interesting answers being alluded to in your posts but none actually presented.

Sorry. I'm scattering everything around. You can read more about my basic income project here: http://www.greshm.org If you don't feel like clicking the link, I'm developing a USD-backed basic income system that does the equivalent of deficit spending to fund a basic income. If you think that sounds crazy, then most people agree with you.

I think it sounds crazy too but I would love to be proven wrong. :) Do you have a background in macroeconomics?

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#222

Post by somenewacc »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #211
guelo wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Last I checked How did you check? Most research I've seen shows that welfare reduces poverty but does not drag down gdp. Anti-welfare people tend to ignore the positive benefits of entrepreneurs being able to take more risks when they know that a bankruptcy won't be catastrophic and that they could still send their children to school and get treatment when they're sick.

Successful entrepreneurs aren't usually on welfare, they come from great backgrounds (hi Sam, Mark, Bill, Donald...).

Being born on a rich family is akin to being on "welfare" through the years you need most.

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#223

Post by csallen »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #215
csallen wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The mantra on HN is that ideas matter and that HN wants to deemphasize names and avoid promoting pieces being posted merely because they are about some celebrity. I think these articles fail that test. I disagree. Whatever you think about the quality of his arguments, the fact that the president of Y Combinator is writing about UBI makes it worth discussing for those who care about the topic, because he has signifi…

Dan Gackle, moderator of HN: For the most part, we keep author names out of HN titles. It's a trick I learned from PG for keeping the focus on the content. ---- Name recognition seems to encourage reflexive upvoting, which is one reason we often take names out of titles. We've removed "Alan Kay" from this one. (Nothing personal—we're fans.) ---- But mostly we take the author's/presenter's name out of titles, in keepi…

I don't have any qualms around taking names out of titles.

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#224

Post by DoreenMichele »

csallen wrote: post #223
DoreenMichele wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dan Gackle, moderator of HN: For the most part, we keep author names out of HN titles. It's a trick I learned from PG for keeping the focus on the content. ---- Name recognition seems to encourage reflexive upvoting, which is one reason we often take names out of titles. We've removed "Alan Kay" from this one. (Nothing personal—we're fans.) ---- But mostly we take the author's/presenter's name out of titles, in keepi…

I don't have any qualms around taking names out of titles.

And yet here we are discussing an article with Sam Altman's name in the title, as is rather often the case on the topic of UBI, and you essentially arguing that this is a good thing.

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#225

Post by irishcoffee »

danenania wrote: post #146
DoreenMichele wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prior to Sam Altman re-envisioning YC as a form of UBI, Paul Graham talked a lot about the idea that the money they gave was insignificant. The real value was in connecting you with movers and shakers and educating you about business creation. Last I checked, UBI does not come with built in business education or introductions to movers and shakers. I was homeless for nearly six years and actively trying to make busin…

I think the idea of the YC money being insignificant comes from its roots as a program for college students. When you're still mostly supported by your parents, the money isn't as big of a deal since you have basically no expenses and endless runway anyway. But when you've got rent, bills, a family, etc., the money is a very big deal and can easily be the difference between having the runway to make it vs. needing to…

> How many people are out there with the potential to be one of the best in the world at something important...

How many important things are there? Lets go with 10,000, which I think is _extremely_ generous. Perhaps there is a better way of enabling people such that we find those 10,000 people. UBI doesn't need to be the solution.

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#226

Post by ben_jones »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #109

The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. Then he goes on to compare YC to basic income. Seriously? They take a share in your company and help you develop it. That isn't money for nothing. If he weren't a millionaire and the current president of YC, would we keep seeing articles…

I mean we shouldn't kid ourselves, this forum is maintained, and funded, because it is of financial benefit to YC (in many different ways). Not because of some higher ideal.

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#227

Post by WalterBright »

Suncho wrote: post #120
DoreenMichele wrote: post #109

The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. Then he goes on to compare YC to basic income. Seriously? They take a share in your company and help you develop it. That isn't money for nothing. If he weren't a millionaire and the current president of YC, would we keep seeing articles…

> The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? > Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. It depends what you mean by "human potential." I agree with you that "human potential" is not the right way to frame what basic income unlocks. By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for…

> By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for the people.

This is a corollary to the myth that wealthy people hoard cash. They do not. 100% of their cash is invested, even the money held in a checking account (because the bank loans it out to people who spend it).

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#228

Post by tomcam »

Suncho wrote: post #120
DoreenMichele wrote: post #109

The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. Then he goes on to compare YC to basic income. Seriously? They take a share in your company and help you develop it. That isn't money for nothing. If he weren't a millionaire and the current president of YC, would we keep seeing articles…

> The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? > Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. It depends what you mean by "human potential." I agree with you that "human potential" is not the right way to frame what basic income unlocks. By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for…

> We have a lot of pointless jobs in the economy that really only exist as an excuse to provide people incomes.

Examples, please? Who are the benefactors giving away these jobs?

EDIT: Parent's answer is at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15919065

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#229

Post by [deleted] »

tomcam wrote: post #228
Suncho wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? > Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. It depends what you mean by "human potential." I agree with you that "human potential" is not the right way to frame what basic income unlocks. By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for…

> We have a lot of pointless jobs in the economy that really only exist as an excuse to provide people incomes. Examples, please? Who are the benefactors giving away these jobs? EDIT: Parent's answer is at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15919065

[deleted]

Re: The Great American Share – Sam Altman Interview on Basic Income

#230

Post by aaron-lebo »

somenewacc wrote: post #222
aaron-lebo wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Successful entrepreneurs aren't usually on welfare, they come from great backgrounds (hi Sam, Mark, Bill, Donald...).

Being born on a rich family is akin to being on "welfare" through the years you need most.

Do you see the difference between living off 1k a month (that's your welfare on BI) and being raised by parents making 150k+?

One's a life of poverty and misery, the other is education, opportunity, social connections, etc. People can get the former already on welfare programs. Why don't we divert that 3 trillion we'd spend on BI and spend half of it in targeted ways that actually increase opportunity?

...all of this makes it weird that the biggest proponents of UBI are ultra wealthy.

Or, in terms software engineers should understand: why a complete rewrite when there's lots of low hanging bugs that we all know about?

Post reply on HN