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

241–250 of 389 posts

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

#241

Post by heynonynony »

nkoren wrote: post #127
Danihan wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The math doesn't work and has never worked. UBI proponents will never talk math because it doesn't add up, even with the most casual analysis. $12k is the cited number that you see a lot in basic income discussions. That's just over the poverty level. That's not enough to live on and it's practically a bonus for some members of this site. It's not enough to do anything with. Even upon receiving that, many people woul…

> The math doesn't work and has never worked. UBI proponents will never talk math because it doesn't add up, even with the most casual analysis. Wrong, utterly wrong, on accounts. > It's not enough to do anything with. You have no idea what it's like to be poor. I grew up poor in America. $12k per year is an absolutely life-changing amount for many people. It means you will not go hungry. It means you will not die of…

sorry but $100K is not a lot of income these days, especially in places like CA and NY, so a 20% tax increase or a loss of $8K/year would be DEVESTATING! so, you just want to f' over all these perceived "wealthy" people (who are actually pretty f'ing middle class in CA or NY) for what? to let slackers play video games all day? F THAT!

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

#242

Post by pkd »

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.

This is a very misinformed opinion. Being a rich kid is not at all akin to being on welfare.

A sibling comment pointed out the diffrence of money, but there's also a gap in the quality and quantity of opportunities to succeed.

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

#243

Post by boomboomsubban »

vkou wrote: post #105
AmericanOP wrote: post #6

In ancient Rome there were a few honest reformers who felt bread subsidies (classical UBI) were deserved by the people. It was an economic argument (as is Sam's) since Roman conquest generated massive wealth that did not reach the masses who made it possible. It was an honest attempt at economic reform by a few forward thinking leaders. Within a generation the movement was captured by politicians who used its popular…

Roman wealth was generated in an unsustainable process - through pillage, theft, and tribute of newly conquered states. As Rome ran out of new conquests, the empire collapsed. Compare that to whether or not modern society can provide for its members sustainably with UBI. By far, the biggest expense people have is housing - which is not limited by some natural law. One of the reasons for why housing on the coasts is s…

Rome reached it's maximum size in 117 AD, the fall of the Western empire is considered to be 476 and the fall of the Eastern empire was 1453. The time between Rome's period of conquest and the "fall" is longer than the US has existed.

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

#244

Post by jpindar »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #230
somenewacc wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>the biggest proponents of UBI are ultra wealthy.

How do you know? How many poor people have you asked?

(P.S. Don't assume that everyone who reads HN is wealthy.)

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

#245

Post by njarboe »

condercet wrote: post #160
crdoconnor wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What storm? We're constantly being told that robots can do work better than workers on low wages but evidence presented to support this is very thin.

"evidence presented to support this is very thin" Autonomous cars are on the roads today. They're a ways off from serving as reliable truckers or taxis, but that's in our future. We're seeing rapid advancements in machine learning, especially in computer vision and abstract strategy games. Trucking alone accounts for 5% of the US GDP [1], and employs 1.7 million Americans annually [2]. That's about 1/10 of the total…

Only 17 million US workers with a population of 320 million. That can't be right. Maybe 1/100?

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

#246

Post by DoreenMichele »

ben_jones wrote: post #226
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.

I have zero problem with HN being of financial benefit to YC. In fact, I have repeatedly said that I think this is exactly why it is able to sustain a standard of excellence.

HN becoming the personal platform for the new YC president's political aspirations and personal pet social theories does not appear to me to be of any financial benefit to YC.

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

#247

Post by dahdum »

firethief wrote: post #236
dahdum wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The other way is thinking of the billions of brains wasted every generation just trying to survive, exactly what humans did 2000 years ago. Now imagine if all these brains could be freed and god knows how much innovation, progress and intellectual output can be unlocked into a completely different kind of society. That's a vision." It's not so cut and dry. I don't believe that incentives under UBI will lead to great…

> what guaranteed monthly checks does to ambition Do you think it's a coincidence that that check is only guaranteed in the absence of ambition? You've seen the perverse incentives of means-tested welfare, not the effects of a UBI.

SNAP, section 8 housing, disability, and other programs are still necessary under UBI unless UBI is absurdly high. If is that high, then the sick/elderly/disabled are hugely disadvantaged relative to those who are not - not a desirable outcome for me.

We should overhaul our existing programs to provide graduated phase outs instead of creating new entitlement programs.

I see UBI in general as having far more perverse incentives than welfare does right now (and they are bad).

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

#248

Post by ericd »

minikites wrote: post #201
danielvf wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The country of Nauru has had universal income since the 1970’s funded by mining resources. Unfortunately, it has not resulted in human potential being unlocked. Outside the mining, run by foreigners and with foreign works, economic activity in the country has gone down. Nauru now has the highest obesity rate in the world. 94.5% of the population is overweight, 71% obese, and 31% diabetic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w…

It's more likely that colonial-style abuses are to blame, here's what happens in a developed nation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome >Mincome was an experimental Canadian guaranteed annual income project that was held in Manitoba, during the 1970s. >University of Manitoba economists Derek Hum and Wayne Simpson analyzed labour supply or work disincentive issues in Mincome during the 1980s and published their res…

Could you please expand on how you think colonialism is to blame? I don't see any suggestion of that in the Wikipedia article.

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

#249

Post by loceng »

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 way I view something like YC similar to basic income is that equity or a dividend from equity owned is like taxes being paid. The important things have to be very clearly defined in order to make a fair judgement call on any plans/experiments that people want to try.

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

#250

Post by lukeschlather »

dahdum wrote: post #156
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…

"By giving people money to spend, it unlocks the economy's potential to produce wealth for the people. We won't produce wealth that people won't buy and basic income allows more people to buy more wealth." Doesn't UBI reduce the economic productivity by both driving up the cost of labor through increased taxation and lowering the supply? Until (if) we are in a post-scarcity world how will lowering productive output e…

Apple's annual profit in 2015 was $50 billion. Divided 1 million ways that's $50,000. So Apple literally can offset 1 million unemployed, at least in a good year. (And really, it seems arguable that they could offset 2-5 million depending, since people certainly live on less than $50k/year.)
Post reply on HN